CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court on Thursday expressed strong concern over the chronic under-utilisation of iron ore mining capacity in Odisha and directed the state government to invoke statutory provisions to ensure optimal extraction of minerals.
Directing concrete action, the division bench comprising Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice MS Raman ordered the state government to invoke Rule 12(1)(ee) to ensure the optimum utilisation of the mines through the National Mineral Development Corporation, noting that such a step would also eradicate any burden on the government exchequer.
The direction came while disposing of a PIL filed by Citizen’s Action Forum, a Bhubaneswar-based NGO. The PIL highlighted that several iron ore blocks in the state, despite having approved mining plans and environmental clearances, have consistently failed to achieve minimum production levels.
According to the petitioner, this persistent underperformance has caused massive revenue losses to the state and aggravated economic distress in key mining districts. Additional government advocate Debashis Tripathy represented the state.
Taking note of an affidavit filed by the state, the court observed that an enquiry conducted during the pendency of the case revealed that majority of the mining lease holders have not secured the optimum extraction of iron ore and that in some cases, penalties were imposed but kept in abeyance due to interim court orders.
The bench noted the facts on record left no ambiguity that there is a patent under-utilisation of the mines by the mining lease holders, yet the state had failed to invoke Rule 12(1)(ee) of the Odisha Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2016. The court underlined that the PIL demonstrated under-utilisation not only in one year but continuously for several years, resulting in loss of statutory revenue and affecting livelihoods of a large number of people.
Referring to the petitioner’s estimate, the court recorded that the state had suffered losses of roughly around `4,000 crore. “The provisions contained in the statutory framework cannot be put to idle or a dead letter,” the bench said.
“The state cannot remain static, but should invoke such provision in the manner provided therein,” it observed.