A civil society organization, Loktantrik Rashtranirman Abhiyan, has written to President Droupadi Murmu urging her to return the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2026, to Parliament for reconsideration. In its memorandum, the group strongly condemned the bill, which has already been passed by both houses and now awaits presidential assent, describing it as “extremely harmful to the federal structure of our polity as envisioned in the Constitution of India.”
The letter alleges that the Central Government has “flagrantly violated the federal principles by inserting some clauses that deprive States of their power to tax legitimately the mining and mineral industry.”
It further states: “If it were not enough, the Bill, adopted by the parliament, favours uncouth Mining and Mineral companies by forbidding the states from recovering the pending taxes. In this way, the defaulter companies are being given benefit retrospectively.”
The group’s detailed objections focus on the insertion of the term “mineral bearing land” in section 2, which it says “enormously expands the purpose of the Act of 1957 and severely restricts the state’s powers over the vast stretches of land.” The letter warns that these are inhabited areas and “people will face eviction since ‘mineral bearing land’ can be defined in whatever manner,” with no responsibility on the state government to resettle them.
It also takes issue with the proposed new section 9D, which bars state governments from imposing any tax, cess, or levy on mineral rights or mineral-bearing lands except under conditions prescribed by the Centre.
The organisation argues that “the State governments are being deprived of their right to any mining and minerals related economic activity in their respective areas.”
The Statement of Objects and Reasons accompanying the bill is dismissed as “nothing but a piece of twisted logic.” The group quotes from the statement, which claims that “any regional disparity in fiscal impositions on minerals impacts public interest” – a reference the letter notes is obviously aimed at state-level levies. It also mocks the assertion that “unbalanced imposition of steep taxes and levies will prompt the industry to completely bypass local supply lines,” asking rhetorically: “Can paying taxes result in pollution load?”
Likewise, it scoffs at the warning about increased imports, saying: “As if imported minerals would be cheaper than the locally produced ones, all due to the tax by a state government, which is termed as ‘fiscal imposition.’”
At the heart of the criticism is the bill’s attempt to override the Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling. The letter recalls that a nine-judge bench had allowed states to impose taxes and levies and permitted them to recover dues retrospectively from 1 April 2005. The new provision, however, deems invalid any such levy that was not deposited or recovered before the commencement of the 2026 amendment.
The group notes that public-sector undertakings and private firms like Tata Steel and Vedanta owed an estimated ₹1.5 to ₹2 lakh crore, and that “this huge amount is being wiped off only to benefit the companies.” It concludes by asking the President to return the bill for two clear reasons: it violates the federal structure by transferring all state powers over land to the Centre, and it protects defaulters while treating states as “rogues who loot the poor companies.”
Comments