Miners raise objections over Google Maps

Shah Panel to hold hearing on Rule-37 violation on March 16

On the first day of hearing of Justice M B Shah Commission here, the mine owners complained that both the illegal mining enquiring agency and the state government have used short cut and unreliable methods to determine lease area encroachments.

"For determining encroachment the Commission used Google images and superimposed it with revenue maps to justify illegal mining. Google maps are not accurate," said Gopal Subramanium , the counsel appearing on behalf of P K Ahluwalia, an iron ore mine lease holder.

The differential global positioning system (DGPS) maps prepared by the state government agency Odisha Remote Sensing Application Centre (ORSAC) is also not correct and hence, a fresh physical verification should be done, he added.

Justice Shah said, the Commission did not doubt the state government prepared maps. He, however, directed the miners to deposit Rs 2 lakh per square kilometre for fresh physical survey of lease areas to be done by the state government staff.

Determination of lease boundary is crucial because as per Mineral Concession Rule (MCR), 1960 , mining activities carried out beyond lease area is defined as illegal mining, which can result in forfeiture of lease. Rule violation done within lease area attracts lesser punishment such as penalties.

Justice Shah made it clear that mining operation without forest and environment clearance and excess mining are key areas which the Commission is enquiring into. Lease area issues are not significant, he said. Regarding excess mineral raising, a counsel, appearing for Sirajuddin mines said miners should be condoned for such act, since it was just rule violation and there was nothing illegal about it.

When the issue of MCR Rule 37 violation (subcontracting of mining lease area) was raised , Shah Commission said, a separate hearing will be conducted on the matter at Ahmedabad on March 16.

He, however, pointed out that there should be a clear policy on Rule 37 violation.

"Rule 37 must make it clear that who should be held responsible for violation," he said when Ram Jethmalani, a counsel for mining contractor Thriveni Earthmovers, objected to summons issued by the Commission.

About 15 miners were asked on Wednesday to clarify their stand regarding rule violation, who included Tata Steel, Essel Mining, KJS Ahluwalia, Indrani Patnaik and Sirajuddin.

The Commission's hearing at Bhubaneswar will continue till Saturday. It is likely to submit its report by May 2013.