(Repeating after an important correction in 4th para, 3rd

A bill to allow transfer of captive mines from one allottee to another without auction was passed by Parliament today, a move that will enable banks and financial institutions to sell stressed assets to recover debts.
Mines Minister Narendra Singh Tomar said in Rajya Sabha that the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2016 is in the larger interest of workers and that the provision was not intended to benefit any industrial house.
The bill was later approved by the House. Lok Sabha had passed the bill on March 16.
The legislation allows mergers and acquisitions worth billions of dollars in the domestic market as the provision of non-transfer of concessions granted otherwise (rpt) otherwise through auction was coming in the way of banks and financial institutions to liquidate stressed assets where a company or its captive mining lease is mortgaged.

Tomar said the Centre is committed for transparency in mines allotment and transfer provision was in the larger interest of workers and was not "intended to benefit industrial houses".
"I assure you that transfer of captive mine will be only for captive purpose and not for any industrial purpose," he said and added that this will benefit workers and will save factories from closure where the original allottee of a mine was not in a position to run it.

"Labourers will be rendered unemployed in case any industry is sick and not transferred. Economcy will be hit," Tomar said replying to a debate on the bill.

He said mining sector was facing severe challenges when the NDA government took over in May 2014 and activities in the sector were virutally "halted" and Supreme Court and Justice Shah Commission were looking into it.
The MMDR Act was passed in 2015 and that resulted in transparency in allocation with neither the Centre nor the states having any special priviliges for allotment of mines, he said.
Tomar said auction notices for 43 mines were out, of which auctioning for six was already done in three states and revenue of Rs 18,946 crore was generated.
The bill pertains to amend the Mines and Minerals Act to

include the provisions of allowing transfer of captive mines granted through procedures other than auction.
The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) (Amendment) Bill, 2016 was brought as the government was of the view that the transfer of captive mining leases, granted otherwise through auction, would facilitate banks and financial institutions to liquidate stressed assets where a company or its captive mining lease is mortgaged.
Earlier, the ministry had sought views from the public, states and industry on amending the MMDR Act to include provisions allowing transfer of captive mines granted through procedures other than auction.
The MMDR Act, passed by Parliament in March last year, only allowed transfer of mining leases in cases where the mine has been acquired through auction.

Through the amendment, the government inserted a clause that says: "Provided that where a mining lease has been granted otherwise than through auction and where minerals from such mining lease is being used for captive purpose, such mining lease will be permitted to be transferred subject to compliance with terms and conditions as prescribed by central government."
The Cabinet in March this year had given its approval for the amendment to the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR Act 1957).
The amendment will allow transfer of captive mining leases not granted through auction.
The amendment will benefit lessees desirous of transferring the captive leases not granted through auction, it added.

The government has also said the move will benefit banks and financial institutions and does not entail any recurring or non-recurring expenditure on the government.
The MMDR Act, passed by Parliament in March last year restricted the scope of transferability of concessions granted through auction. It was restricting the mergers and acquisitions of companies and was impeding the ease of doing business for companies dependent on supply of mineral ore from captive leases.
(Reopen PAR39)
Tomar urged the MPs to ensure that the funds deposited in District Mineral Foundation was properly utilised and requested them to hold meetings with District Commissioners in this regard.

"This Rs 6,000 crore is only for the welfare of persons affected and for the development of the area," the minister said.
After the Bill was passed, Madhusudan Mistry (Cong) raised a point of order that there was "flouting of rules and I see members crossing during the speech".
He requested Deputy Chairman P J Kurien to ensure that the rules are not violated. Kurien said members are not supposed to cross the Chair.
Earlier, initiating the debate on the bill, Shantaram Naik (Cong) supported the amendments but expressed concern over impact of mining ban in Goa on livelihood of many people.

He also blamed Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar for banning mining activities in Goa when he was Chief Minister.
Parrikar, who as CM, had criticised Congress for mining activities, gave contrary statements after the BJP came to power, Naik said.
He also alleged that the Shah Commission, which was appointed to look into illegal mining of iron ore, gave the report as per "whims and fancies".
The Congress member expressed concern over lack of transparency in transfer of mine leases, improper way of closing mines and absence of any clause to protect workers among others.
He insisted on having a proper mining plan and effective use of national and state mineral fund for welfare of workers involved in the mining activity.

Bhupender Yadav (BJP) contended that there was no discrepancy in the Shah Commission report and there was no need to oppose the report in the House now.
Veer Singh (BSP) supported the bill and suggested that the government should take care of impact of mining on environment.
Tapan Kumar Sen (CPI-M) said mineral resources should not be allowed for trading purpose and be used for value addition within the country.
Sharing his apprehension about the tranfer of mine leases, he said, "This will open the door for trading. After the tranfer, what is the guarantee that it will nto be used for trading purpose?"

He also raised concerned over lack of protection of workers in the bill.
Dilip Kumar Tirkey (BJD) supported the bill saying that such transfer of mine leases are prevalent in other countries as well.
He, however, demanded that the state governments' permission be sought while such transfers takes place and sought amendement of section 17(a) of the bill to allow area limit exemption.
Mistry expressed concern over plight of tribals in mining areas and the need to provide more facilities for this community.