Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik has voiced his opposition to some provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Bill-2011, stating that the bill if enacted in the current form would be a departure from federal structure of the constitution.
Pointing out that regulation of mines and mineral development is basically a state subject, Patnaik said that the MMDR Bill attempts to transfer certain powers and functions being exercised by states to the Centre.
Patnaik has written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, urging him to have a re-look at the various provisions of the Bill and modify them to ensure that the the federal structure is not violated.
He said, the Bill has some provisions that were not present in the MMDR Act-1957.
One such provision which has aroused the state Chief Minister's wrath is the power given to Indian Bureau of Mines (IBM) under Union ministry of mines, to supervise functions of the state government.
This provision states that if illegal or unscientific mining is going on in any state, then IBM or such authority would make a report to this effect to the Centre and the Centre may issue such direction as it may consider necessary to the state government. In case of non-compliance on these directions by state governments, the Centre can direct IBM or such authority to file written complaint for investigation and prosecution of offences, revocation of mineral concessions and any other measures as may be deemed fit in the circumstances.
The state government has also taken exception to vesting judicial and investigative functions in the National Regulatory Authority proposed under Section 58 (1) of the Bill.
"While establishment of the National Regulatory Authority to perform advisory and recommendatory functions is welcome, creating a superior body with investigative and judicial functions to entertain complaints, give directions to the state governments, initiate investigation and lodge prosecution encroaches upon the domain of the state government and is not in keeping with the federal structure envisaged in the constitution. Therefore, all these issues need to be re-looked and the relevant sections in the proposed Bill should be accordingly modified or altogether omitted”, Patnaik wrote in his letter.
