JavaScript must be enabled in order for you to use the Site in standard view. However, it seems JavaScript is either disabled or not supported by your browser. To use standard view, enable JavaScript by changing your browser options.

| Last Updated:10/02/2015

Latest News(Archive)

Latest News

State’s new mining rules may lead to 2G-like scams

 

Thiruvananthapuram | Feb 10, 2015:

The revised mining rules awaiting formal notification of the government could fall foul of existing laws and lead to scams, dragging the State into protracted litigation, experts feel.

 

The draft notification on the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2014 issued by the Industries Department prescribes preferential right for the first applicant in granting quarrying permit. “This is the basic issue with the 2G and coal block allocation scams,” says environmental activist and lawyer Harish Vasudevan.

 

Arbitrary, subjective
“Preferential right is highly arbitrary and subjective. Imagine a situation wherein a person applies for all the rock reserves in the State before someone else. The rules also prescribe that a person cannot hold more than 2 sq km of land on lease in total, but there is nothing to stop a lessee from taking lease in the names of other family members.”

 

Experts feel that a new system of online allocation of quarrying leases, such as the one the Union government has introduced for coal blocks, would be the better option.

 

Distance from forests
Environmental experts point that the provision in the revised rules giving scope for mining from areas just 50 m from forestlands constitutes a violation of the Wildlife Protection Act of India. The rules permit mining from areas which are just 50 m to 100 m away from the nearest residential building.

 

“This is irrational, unfair and seems to be an attempt to help the mining lobby,” says Mr. Vasudevan. “The minimum distance was fixed as 50 m in the KMMCR 1967 when mining was done without using explosives. There is no reason for Kerala to lower the safety standard when neighbouring States have prescribed a minimum distance of 300 m to avoid pollution and damage to life and property”.

 

Conflict with statutes
Another loophole pointed out by experts is the potential for conflict with other statutes like the Central Biological Diversity Act and the Conservation of Paddylands and Wetlands Act of the State. There is no provision in the rules to identify whether an area described in the application for mining lease is protected under either of the two laws.

 

A mining lease issued in such a protected area will violate the provisions of the Act and hence can be challenged in a court of law, says Oommen V. Oommen, Chairman, Kerala State Biodiversity Board and member, State Expert Appraisal Committee. “Before notifying the revised rules, the Industries Department has to rule out a conflict with the existing laws,” he said.

 

 

(Source: http://www.thehindu.com/)