ILLEGAL MINING

Beachside troubles

Over 1.35 million tonnes of ilmenite and 205,000 tonnes of garnet were illegally mined in Tamil Nadu between 2007 and 2012 

Last month the Atomic Minerals Directorate for Exploration and Research (AMD) demanded a separate body to regulate illegal mining and export of beach sand minerals. Beach sand is rich in seven heavy minerals—ilmenite, leucoxene, rutile, zircon, sillimanite, garnet and monazite. They are processed to derive rare earth elements and titanium that are used in a variety of industries, including paints and cosmetics (see ‘Precious minerals’).

Rampant illegal mining and export of beach sand minerals forced the National Green Tribunal (NGT) to impose a blanket ban on August 16 last year. Beach sand mining primarily happens in Tamil Nadu and Kerala. The mining ministry had till then issued 123 licences, of which 81 are for private players.

Mining companies are required to take separate licences for mining each of the beach sand minerals. But since the seven minerals occur together, mining companies extract all the minerals without licences. The Indian Bureau of Mines, under the Ministry of Mines (MoM), gives approvals for mining garnet and sillimanite, and AMD, which is the research unit of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), gives licences to mine the remaining minerals. Also, DAE officials said last year that private mining companies are not filing statutory returns that show how much has been mined from a particular mining lease.

Precious minerals Over 80 per cent of world’s titanium is derived from beach sand minerals ilmenite and rutile. India accounts for 15 per cent of the global titanium output. Over 50 per cent of titanium dioxide production is used to manufacture pigments in lacquers, paints and enamels. The dioxide, which absorbs ultraviolet light, is used in sunscreen lotions as well. Titanium’s non-reactive property makes it ideal to be used in the human body for orthopaedic use. Titanium is used instead of steel as the metal is 45 per cent lighter than steel, and twice as strong as aluminium. Zircon is used as foundry sand, in television screens and in the chemical industry. It is widely used in the ceramics industry. It is also used in leather tanning and paper coating industry, and in modern superconductors due to its high melting point. Garnet is a good abrasive and is used as a replacement of silica in sand blasting. Mixed with high pressure water, garnet is used to cut steel. Sillimanite rocks are used in the glass industry and in alumina refractories.

AMD officials say checking such illegal cases becomes difficult as two bodies are responsible for giving mining licences for the minerals. This is the reason AMD demanded a single body to give mining leases during a meeting organised by MoM on January 9 this year. An MoM official told Down To Earth, since beach sand minerals such as monazite are rich in radioactive minerals, AMD should approve mining plans. A final decision is yet to be taken.

In abundance

Workers carry beach sand minerals on a boatIndia has the third largest reserve of beach sand minerals, with 13 per cent share of the world reserves. India meets 6 to 7 per cent of the world demand for beach sand minerals. According to the Working Group of Planning Commission for the 12th Plan, mining of beach sand minerals in India is expected to reach about 0.18 million tonnes per year by 2017, which will account for 10 per cent of the global production. In 2011-12, India exported 52 per cent of its beach sand minerals to China, 18 per cent to the Netherlands and 10 per cent to Japan, as per the data from Director General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics.

Illegal export of beach sand minerals increased after DAE passed a notification in 2007, allowing mining companies to export six of the seven beach sand minerals. The export of monazite was not allowed because it is primarily used to produce uranium and thorium, which are used as fuels for nuclear plants. The Indian Minerals Year Book estimates that India’s coastline has a deposit of 10.7 million tonnes of monazite, from which 846,477 tonnes of thorium can be extracted.

Indiscriminate mining

A Tamil Nadu government-appointed task force found that between 2007 and 2012, about 1.35 million tonnes of ilmenite and 205,000 tonnes of garnet were mined illegally from the state. Monazite-rich sand was dumped near settlements (see ‘Hazardous mining’).

Hazardous mining “People working in sites where monazite-rich sand are illegally dumped often inhale the thorium-rich dust. Although, radiation exposure from beach sand mining is less than the permissible levels of DAE, over a period of time radioactive chemicals inhaled through dust can harm the lungs of the workers,” says P M B Pillai, a scientist with Indian Rare Earth Limited, the government agency that sells monazite. While very few studies on the long-term effects of monazite-rich sand have been conducted in India, global studies have found the process of mining these minerals is not safe. “It is difficult to obtain clean separation of ilmenite and monazite… Ilmenite concentrates obtained from such deposits often contain high levels of thorium and uranium,” states South African scientist J Nell in his study published in the Journal of South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy in 2010. Another study published in the same journal in 2004 states that the existence of radioactive minerals like monazite is becoming an increasing problem.

In a report to the Tamil Nadu government in 2010, the then Kanyakumari district collector Rajendra Ratnoo said he banned beach sand mining in the district after finding that V V Minerals, the biggest private beach minerals mining company in the country with a turnover of Rs 45 crore, was dumping monazite-rich sand after the chemical separation process. As a result, workers and residents were exposed to radioactivity. As per AMD guidelines, mining companies should backfill monazite-rich sand on the beaches and cover it with silica. V V Minerals filed a petition in the Madras High Court seeking to resume mining. The court lifted the ban as the district collectorate did not have the equipment to record radioactivity.

Source: Indian Minerals Yearbook 2013Soon after, Tuticorin collector Ashish Kumar raided six quarries of private miners, V V Minerals and Beach Sand Minerals Company, and banned beach sand mining in the district. In a letter to the chief secretary of Tamil Nadu, Kumar complained that private companies had been mining beyond their lease areas.

V Sundaram, former deputy collector of Tamil Nadu’s Tirunelveli district who in 2012 sought information about beach sand mining under RTI, estimates Rs 96,000 crore worth of monazite (approximately 0.15 million tonnes) has been exported illegally since private players entered the market in 1998.

While AMD officials admit that the six allowed minerals are being exported illegally, they maintain monazite is not. According to S K Malhotra, head of AMD’s public awareness division, all processing facilities have to procure a licence from the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board for radiological safety. “DAE has taken initiatives to maintain vigil at ports and to strengthen sampling mechanism for monitoring beach sand minerals,” says Malhotra.

In September 2013, MoM asked DAE to ban the export of all beach sand minerals by mining companies. Private mining bodies such as Mining Engineers’ Association of India (MEAI), however, are demanding that the ban on monazite export should also be lifted. “It will benefit society if private companies are allowed in the sector. Private sector is already engaged in its production in countries such as Brazil and Australia,” says T V Chowdary of MEAI.

Mining ministry officials say the decision on a single body for clearances will be taken soon. Till then the approval and monitoring of mining leases will remain complicated.

Supreme Court lifts Goa mining ban, but caps annual output

The Supreme Court on Monday lifted the ban on mining iron ore in Goa, but put an annual cap of 20 million tonnes on excavation.

In its judgment, the Green Bench, comprising Justices A.K. Patnaik, S.S. Nijjar and Ibrahim Kalifulla, said: “The panel [an expert committee] had suggested that for the time being, annual excavation of 20 million tonnes of iron ore may be permitted in Goa with adequate monitoring of its impact on different ecological and environmental parameters, which will also help the expert committee in its future appraisal.”

Justice Patnaik said: “We find from the report of the expert committee that Goa heavily depended on iron ore mining for revenue as well as employment. The legislative policy behind the Mines and Minerals Development Regulations Act made by Parliament is mineral development through mining.”

The Bench said a ban to protect the environment would seriously affect the livelihood of nearly 1.5 lakh people in the State who were employed in the industry. Many people had taken loans and bought lorries for transportation of iron ore. The State government’s policy was to encourage mineral mining.

“We cannot, therefore, prohibit mining altogether, but if mining has to continue, the lessees who benefit the most from it must contribute 10 per cent of their sale proceeds to the Goan Iron Ore Permanent Fund for sustainable mining,” the Bench said.

It directed the State Department of Mines and Geology and the State Pollution Control Board to monitor mining, in consultation with other statutory bodies.

The Bench asked the State government to frame a comprehensive scheme, in consultation with the Central Empowered Committee, and submit a report within six months.

The Bench rejected a plea to quash the Justice Shah Commission report on the ground that no notice was given to the lessees. The commission found large-scale irregularities in mining.

But the Bench said: “We cannot also direct prosecution of the mining lessees on the basis of the findings in the report of the Justice Shah Commission, if they have not been given the opportunity of being heard and to produce evidence in their defence.

Sustainable mining

The Supreme Court’s verdict permitting resumption of iron-ore mining in Goa with a temporary cap of 20 million tonnes per annum is welcome for more reasons than one. First, the lifting of the mining ban will restore livelihoods to a vast number of people in a State whose economy is powered by the twin engines of mining and tourism. By the Court’s own finding, more than 1.5 lakh Goans depend on the mining industry directly, and then there are downstream beneficiaries such as truck operators and other service providers. The State’s economy has suffered, as indeed the country’s exports, due to the 18-month ban. The verdict represents an acknowledgement that the problem with mining is not the activity itself; rather, it is illegal and unregulated mining that needs to be clamped down upon. The problem in Goa, as also in Karnataka, began with the unscrupulous activities of some mining companies which pushed the boundaries of their operations, literally and figuratively, beyond legal limits. Mining in areas outside the lease territory, under-reporting production both in quantitative and qualitative terms and showing scant regard for the environment were the reasons that attracted action from the NGOs and the public and caused the courts to step in with a ban. It is shocking that the exports of iron ore exceeded official production figures in each of the five years between 2006-07 and 2010-11. This is evidence of illegal mining.

The Supreme Court has now defined the framework, inclusive of directions to the Centre and the State government over the promulgation of rules and adherence to them. It has also acknowledged the concerns of environmentalists by prohibiting mining within a kilometre of the boundaries of national parks and sanctuaries in Goa. By directing the Centre to notify eco-sensitive zones around national parks and sanctuaries within six months, the Court has ensured that the mining industry’s territory is clearly marked out and there is no possibility of harm being caused to the ecology and environment. The interim solution of allowing up to 20 million tonnes of ore to be mined per annum until the expert committee appointed by the Supreme Court comes up with its final report in the next 12 months, is a fair one as it takes into account the interests of both the mining industry and the environment. With the State government now being permitted to grant fresh leases as per its own policy, whether by auction or other means, the onus is now clearly on it to move quickly in framing a transparent policy in this regard. A well-regulated mining industry that is also environmentally sustainable is not a difficult goal to achieve if the government sets its mind to it.

Curb on mining in Western Ghats

THE MINISTRY of Environment and Forests (MoEF) has accepted therecommendations of a high-level working group to declare over one-third of the Western Ghats ecologically sensitive. Once the notification is in place, mining, quarrying, thermal power plants and highly polluting industries will be banned in 60,000 sq km of the Ghats. Projects will be allowed only after the approval of the gram sabhas concerned.

The Western Ghats extend from Gujarat to Tamil Nadu, covering an area of over 164,000 sq km. The mountain range has been identified as one of the world’s eight richest biodiversity hot spots and received the UNESCO World Heritage Site tag last year. MoEF’s decision has come after the recommendations of the high-level working group, headed by Planning Commission member K Kasturirangan. In April, the panel had recommended that 37 per cent area of the Western Ghats represents a band of contiguous vegetation and polluting industries should not be allowed there.

The Kasturirangan panel was constituted by MoEF to look into the recommendations of an earlier report submitted by the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel, headed by ecologist Madhav Gadgil. The Gadgil panel was formed by MoEF in 2010 to study the impact of population pressure, climate change and development activities on the Western Ghats. It had recommended that almost the entire Western Ghats should be declared ecologically sensitive area (ESA). It proposed that the Ghats be categorised in three zones with different degrees of protection.

Though the report was supported by ecologists, it was opposed by the states where the mountain range stretches and by politicians and farmers’ organisations who feared it would hamper development. In light of the objections it had received, MoEF constituted the Kasturirangan panel in August last year.

The panel was tasked with finding a holistic way of protecting the biodiversity of the Ghats and addressing the “rightful aspirations for inclusive growth and sustainable development” of the “indigenous residents”. The panel then came up with an estimate, saying 41 per cent of the Western Ghats is “natural landscape”, having low population impact and rich biodiversity. The remaining 59 per cent is “cultural landscape” dominated by human settlements and agricultural fields. The panel recommended that 90 per cent of the “natural landscape” should be protected (see ‘Impact of Kasturirangan report’). The identification of ESA was based on the fragmentation of the forests, population density of villages and the richness of the biodiversity in villages.

Impact of Kasturirangan report The Ministry of Environment and Forests issued a notification on October 19 accepting the recommendations of the Kasturirangan panel 1. A ban on all polluting industries (including mining) categorised as most hazardous in the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 2.The Forest Rights Act, 2006, that recognises the rights of dwellers on forest resources, will be implemented in letter and spirit and the consent of gram sabhas concerned will be mandatory for any project 3. Hydro-power projects will be allowed subject to stringent conditions proposed by the Kasturirangan panel. These include cumulative impact assessment of such projects and ensuring minimum water flow in the rivers in the lean season 4.A body to assess and report on the ecology of the region and to support the implementation of ESA to be set up 5. Differing with the Kasturirangan panel recommendation that windmill projects be brought under environment impact assessment notification, Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) said such projects will be allowed in ecologically sensitive area (ESA) as per existing regulations only 6. In a major departure from all the other ESAs notified in the country, villages falling under the Western Ghats ESA will have a prominent say in decision-making on future projects in the region 7. A ban on construction projects of over 20,000 square metre. But, projects which are already undergoing approval process will be considered 8. MoEF has also lifted the moratorium on mining in Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg districts on the basis of the Kasturirangan report which said that a substantial area of the two districts fell outside the proposed ESA 9. Incentives will be given to the states in the Western Ghats to promote “green development”. These include creation of a special sustainable development fund by the Planning Commission to compensate for restricting development in ESA and higher payments under the 14th Finance Commission’s recommendation to keep the forest cover intact 10. A high-level committee of the MoEF will be set-up to monitor the implementation of the Kasturirangan panel recommendations

The controversy

In Kerala, a day-long shut-down was observed on October 18 in Idukki and Wayanad districts and on October 21 in Kozhikode. In Idukki, the reason behind protests was farmers’ fear of losing their chance to get title deeds. Many migrant farmers in the mountain range have not received title deeds despite an all-party decision taken in 1983 to give title deeds to all farmers who settled in the forests before 1977. “If ESA is notified, the chances of getting title deeds become grim,” says C V Verghese, CPI(M) leader from Idukki.

Sebastian Kochupurakkal, chairperson of the High Ranges Protection Council, which is leading the agitations in Idukki, says many farmers were brought into the district during the Grow More Food Campaign (1932-1950) and many others settled as workers on government projects. “They are not encroachers and their day-to-day life will be affected by the declaration of ESA,” he says.

But environmental activists in the district oppose this argument.

The mountain range has been identified as one of the world’s eight richest biodiversity hot spots and received the UNESCO World Heritage Site tag

M N Jayachandran, an environmental activist in Kerala, says, “The issue of title deeds has nothing to do with either the Gadgil report or the Kasturirangan report.” Political and religious leaders want to keep the issue alive to retain their grip over people, he says. There have been a lot of wrong campaigns against both the reports by the ruling United Democratic Front, the opposition, the Left Democratic Front and a section of the Catholic Church, which, he says, has even issued circulars wrongly interpreting the reports and fanning fears of the people.

While protests are being held against the Kasturirangan recommendations, some environmentalists are demanding that the entire Western Ghats be notified as ESA, as per the Gadgil panel recommendations. The Kerala Shastra Sahitya Parishad, the people’s science movement, have issued statements supporting the Gadgil report. V S Vijayan, former chairperson of the state biodiversity board and member of the Gadgil Committee, says the Kasturirangan Committee report focuses more on economic exploitation of the Western Ghats while sidelining conservation. “The only bar inside ESA is on mining, quarrying and sand mining. Most polluting industries can be allowed outside ESA and less polluting industries can be allowed even inside ESA,” he says. “In a way, it amounts to opening up entire Western Ghats for development,” he adds.

What next

In an all party meet convened by Kerala Chief Minister Oommen Chandy on October 21, it was decided to constitute an expert committee to study the Kasturirangan Committee recommendations.

“The state will intimate its views to the Centre after holding discussions with people’s representatives and representatives of farmers’ organisations in the villages which come under ESA identified by the report,” said the chief minister in Thiruvananthapuram on October 21 during a media conference.

The decision of the Congress-led state government has been criticised even by party MLAs. “The Kerala government and political parties are taking the side of the mining mafia,” says V D Satheesan, a Congress MLA. According to him, the Kasturirangan report is weak on conservation efforts. “Kerala does not want this diluted report which recommends conservation of only about 37 per cent of the Western Ghats,” he says. The Ghats pass through 13 of the 14 districts in the state. The Kasturirangan committee has identified 123 villages in 24 Western Ghats talukas to be notified as ESA.

Environmentalists point out that the state government and political parties are buying time by appointing a new committee. “When the Gadgil Committee report was released, neither the state government nor political parties made any effort to translate the report in the regional language or to take it to the people for discussion. The decision to constitute another committee reflects a lack of concern for the Western Ghats and the well-being of the people in the state,” says A Latha, an environmental activist with the Chalakkudi River Research Centre in Kerala.

Mining: A complete overhaul is needed

Outdated regulations, bureaucratic delays and a hyperactive judiciary have laid low the hopes of this sector

India’s iron ore production has dropped from 230 million tonnes (mt) to a mere 140mt in 2013-14, while coal imports jumped to 171mt in 2013-14 from 60-70mt in 2009-10.

Mining contributes a miniscule 1.9% to the gross domestic product of India. This belies India’s strong resource position in the world as among the top five owners of coal, iron ore and bauxite. State-owned mining companies account for 70% of the production by value, while the private sector is relegated mostly to captive production with highly fragmented holding.

Outdated regulations, bureaucratic delays and a hyperactive judiciary have laid low the hopes of this emerging sector. India’s iron ore production has dropped from 230 million tonnes (mt) to a mere 140mt in 2013-14, while coal imports jumped to 171mt in 2013-14 from 60-70mt in 2009-10. Anil Agarwal, chairman of the world’s eighth largest diversified mining company Vedanta Resources Plc, has openly regretted having made a $6 billion investment in aluminium plants in Odisha given its struggle to get bauxite. In fact, reverse foreign direct investment has gained momentum as companies such as Adani, Jindal, GVK and NMDC Ltd have started buying overseas mining assets. A complete overhaul is the need of the hour.

The immediate starting point is to revamp the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. The previous government did attempt to do so but could not take it to the logical conclusion and the amendment lapsed. We have to move away from free allocation of resources to an auctioning process for efficient use of resources, reduce crony capitalism and fast-track investment.

To attract investment in exploration, the government needs to bring in ‘open sky’ policy for reconnaissance permit, ensure seamless transition from prospecting licence (PL) to mining lease (ML) and guarantee rights to sell and transfer PL and ML.

Streamlining the tax structure and ensuring transparency is also extremely important for attracting investment. India boasts of the highest tax rate on iron ore today in the world. A firm has to pay 10% of the sale price as royalty and 30% of it as export tax. Even railway freight is around 30% of sale price.

If this is not enough, Karnataka has levied an additional 10% of the sale price as local area development charge on iron miners. Now with 80% of sale price gone, if a company makes any profit, it has to pay 33% income tax. No wonder production has dipped by almost 40% in the past two years while we continue to leave no stone unturned to kill the iron-ore mining industry. If we squeeze these companies during a commodity bull cycle, why should we even expect further investments in exploration and value-addition facilities?

One positive step the government has already taken is to move away from specific tonnage-based royalty to taxes based on assessed value. Next, it put a cap on the maximum percentage of taxes, which will go a long way in removing uncertainty.

To make the industry globally competitive, it is desirable to remove restrictive trade practices. The domestic steel industry is clamouring about preserving domestic iron ore lest we run out of the resource in the future. India has 25 billion tonnes of iron ore reserves at a cut-off grade of 55% iron content, or around 100 years of consumption. This would double if the cut-off grade is reduced to, say, 30%. And all this is based on some preliminary exploration done by government agencies like the Geological Survey of India.

The situation appears similar to what happened in Australia in the 1960s. At that time it was estimated that Australia had only 400mt of iron ore reserves and iron ore export was banned. Now after 50 years, Australia exports almost 600mt of iron ore per year and still has 40 billion tonnes left in reserves.

India is largely still an untapped potential. The large steel companies have benefited quite handsomely over the last 10 years due to access to cheap captive iron ore resource. It might make sense to give captive resources to attract investments but this also breeds inefficiency. Many steel companies have been sitting on large resources without developing them. Also, having access to large and free resources has led to sub-optimal utilization of natural resources. This is evident from large dumps of iron ore fines and blue dust at these mines. Steel Authority of India Ltd alone is supposed to be sitting on 45mt of iron ore fines and blue dust dumps. Thanks to China, we have been able to clear this mess to some extent. Faced with a mining ban in Karnataka, JSW Steel Ltd not only adapted to survive, but also became one of the most efficient steel companies in the country, despite using one of the worst quality iron ore.

Infrastructure is another important challenge facing the mining industry. Railway haulage in India is six times what companies in Australia or China incur. Coal India Ltd claims it can increase production by a whopping 300mt, or almost by two-thirds, if the government can construct three railway links of 50-100km each. It seems unbelievable that something as small as this can hold our country to ransom. A new resolve is needed here.

Having the same party in power both at the centre and the state might help resolve the matter. All hopes are on the new government. Can it modify the growth path?

Illegal mining, policy reforms among priorities

The industry is still not sure that the new government will be able to pull off some of the mega reforms required

The mining and quarrying sector contributed just 1.9% to gross domestic product (GDP) and steel contributed roughly 2% in 2013-14, but collectively, the metals and mining sector forms the core of industrial growth.

Mumbai: India’s metals and mining companies are hoping the new government will put to rest the controversial illegal mining issue that stalled the sector’s growth, introduce regulatory reforms, raise investments and help revive consumer demand.

The mining and quarrying sector contributed just 1.9% to gross domestic product (GDP) and steel contributed roughly 2% in 2013-14, but collectively, the metals and mining sector forms the core of industrial growth. Expectations are that reforms could be in store for this sector as the government takes steps to accelerate economic growth.

“Metal and mining seemingly has a small share in the GDP, but its allied sectors are totally dependent on it for their growth,” saidHitesh Avachat, group head - metals and mining at Care Research. “So, if mining doesn’t grow, others won’t grow.” 

India’s infrastructure, automobiles and consumer goods sectors are dependent on iron ore and steel—the power sector’s single-biggest raw material is coal and the electrical and packaging industries bank on bauxite and aluminium.

In fiscal 2013-14, the mining sector contracted by 0.8% year-on-year, and overall industrial production contracted by 0.8%, reflecting the stress this sector bore out on account of the crackdown on the mining sector since 2011 and the policy impasse that followed.

Now the industry is expecting that the government will take policy measures that will attract more foreign players to bring in investments and skills, initiate transparent auctioning of mining blocks, lower the mining tax rates that range from 60-80%, give a single-window clearance to cover land acquisition and mining licences and also stimulate growth in the sectors that consume minerals.

“The more important thing is to resume mining in the states where it is closed or partially so,” said Ritesh Shah, metal and mining analyst at Espirito Santo Securities India Pvt. Ltd. “Export duty change to curb imports of steel could be another actionable (item).”

However, the industry is still not sure that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government that won the 2014 elections with a thumping majority will be able to pull off some of the mega reforms that would need structural changes and amendments to the mining law.

“The BJP manifesto doesn’t explicitly say what it will do to the metals and mining sector, so people are cautiously optimistic,” said the head of a large foreign company that has investments in India. He did not wish to be named.

The biggest piece of reform would be to conduct transparent auction of natural resources blocks, in line with expectations after a Supreme Court ruling in 2012 said auctioning should be the way forward. But to grow the sector, more exploration will be needed, as well as a win-win plan that will enable locals to give up land.

“India has not found any new mineral deposit in the last 40 years,” said the executive cited earlier. “It is not as if exploration will displace people. There is modern technology available.”

To bring in foreign companies, the government will have to sweeten deals by allowing them to sell commercially in the local market. Such companies are unlikely to be pleased with export curbs.

The big stranded projects such as Posco’s project in Odisha, which at $12 billion is the largest foreign direct investment (FDI) in India, would need state-level clearances for mine and land acquisition. Local protests may be an additional hurdle beyond the control of the centre.

The large taxes on mining will be another issue. The effective tax rates are 60-80%, which is burdening miners. Plus the new mining Bill, that proposes that a quarter of net profit be shared with locals, will be another dampener.

“The problem with the mining sector is, it is still carried under three major Acts which are very old and need some very important amendments,” said Care’s Avachat. These are Mines and Minerals (Development Regulation) Act, 1957; Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. 

Also as the Supreme Court case against illegal mining in Odisha is heard out, most of the regulatory decisions will be guided by court rulings.