The Jharkhand government has, going by the Supreme Court view that mining by companies subsequent to expiry of their last lease tenure had been illegal, asked 12 state iron ore mining companies, including SAIL and Tata Steel, to pay up at market rate the value of iron ore extracted from the mines from the date of expiry of lease to the date of current renewal, whenever that takes place.
The particular condition is among several others the state has put down in the lease renewal offer it made on Thursday to the companies. While SAIL and Tata Steel have both confirmed receiving the letter, some others said they were yet to receive it.
Tata Steel sources said the company was examining the conditions put forth by the state in its lease renewal offer which senior company officials were examining closely and that the company was, in due course, likely to give a conditional acceptance to the offer. SAIL sources said the top management was still examining the lease renewal clauses.
Included in the 12 mines, which the state mines department had shut on September 3 and whose proposals were sent recently to the state cabinet, are three mines of SAIL (Gua?s Durgaiburu, Chiria?s Budhaburu and Kiruburu & Meghahataburu), Tata Steel?s Noamundi mine and the manganese mine of Orissa Manganese & Minerals (of Adhunik group) in Ghatkuri reserve forest.
Going by the apex court?s decision of calling mining after expiry of lease tenure as illegal, the companies caught in the quagmire would have to pay in thousands of crores to get their mining leases renewed.
The Jharkhand letter to the companies does not spell out the amount they have to pay for the ?illegal? mining done by them, which in almost all cases has been an overrun of their last lease tenure.
SAIL sources said this particular condition among several others put by Jharkhand was harsher than that spelt out by neighbouring Odisha when leases were renewed by that state in the recent past. ?The vital difference between the clause put by the Odisha government and that put by Jharkhand is that while Odisha said it (the amount to be paid for minerals extracted in the interim period i.e between expiry of lease and date of current renewal termed as ?illegal? mining) would be ?in accordance with law?, Jharkhand treats the interim period as void, saying that since such mining had been illegal, the companies have to pay up for the minerals at the market rate,? said a SAIL source.
Other mining sources, however, said that since Odisha had already initiated the lease renewal process by issuing showcause notices to companies, got their replies and put up a demand notice against which the companies got a stay order from court, it was apt for the state to put the ?in accordance with law? clause. ?There was already a legal process of renewal of leases going on in Odisha whereas in Jharkhand, the adding of the clause seems to be an afterthought as the state had till issuance of the letter not taken any step towards renewing leases,? said a source.
Officials of some companies affected by closure of mines said while individual companies were somehow managing the production side without iron ore supply from their mines, they were concerned that undue delay in renewing leases could result any time in a law and order problem in and around the vicinity of the mines as a sizeable number of contractors? labour working on daily wages was involved in mining and other allied activities and was without work. ?Closure of mines of SAIL, Tata Steel, Hindustan Copper, Hindalco and others is impacting the whole eco-system around their mines,? said an official associated with iron ore mining.