"The hearing is underway at the DDM (deputy director of mines) level to recover cost of excess ore raised by the lessees. We had issued notices to the lessees that had extracted excess ore and now the final demand is going to be raised”, said steel & mines secretary Rajesh Verma.
The state steel & mines department had imposed a total penalty of Rs 65,492.73 crore on 104 errant lessees found guilty of extracting excess ore during 2001-10, a move contested by around 20 miners in the revision authority under Union mines ministry. The government had invoked Section 21 (5) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) MMDR Act-1957 for recovering cost of production.
The Society for Geoscientists & Allied Technologists (SGAT), a body dedicated to promotion of mineral development, had termed the penalty on excess mining 'unjustified'.
"As such demand raised on the lessees to pay the price of ore raised in excess of quantity approved in the mining plan, environment clearance and consent letter retrospectively is totally unjustified more so when permission had been accorded for despatch of such ores from the lease areas and royalty collected”, SGAT stated in a note submitted to the Shah Commission of enquiry probing into large scale mining of iron ore and manganese ore without lawful authority.
SGAT also held that ore production reported in a mining plan approved by Indian Bureau of Mines (IBM) cannot be construed as illegal.
“Section 21 (5) of MMDR Act- 1957 is clearly applicable on such land which is occupied without lawful authority. It is clarified that in the context of Mines and Minerals Development & Regulation (MMDR) Act-1957, violations pertaining to mining operations within the mining lease area are to be dealt with only in terms of the provisions of Mineral Conservation & Development Rules (MCDR)-1988. However, the interpretation that a land granted under a mining lease by the state government can be held to be occupied without lawful authority on the grounds of provisions of any other law of the land is not appropriate and such interpretation may not stand in the court of law”, SGAT stated in the memorandum to the Shah Commission.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
)