Twitter
Advertisement

dna special: 70% of legal mines also flout environment rules

Latest News
article-main
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

Why dredge up instances of only illegal sand mines causing irreversible damage to our environment? It turns out that 70% of even legal mines have been no different.

A total of 2,520 mines, owned by various private and public companies, were inspected in 2012-13 by the Indian Bureau of Mines (IBM) — an authority tasked by the ministry of mines with the responsibility of enforcing conservation and systematic development of mineral resources in the country. Of these, states a report of the IBM, 1,780 — many of which were of iron ore, bauxite and limestone — were found to be flouting mining and environmental guidelines.

The violations included extracting more than the authorised share of minerals, having no waste disposal system in place and failing to plant saplings or backfilling mines.

While many of these mines are owned by leading cement manufacturing companies, some public sector undertakings also figured on the list.

To add insult to injury, the errant mine owners cared and feared  little.

The IBM carries out inspection under the Mineral Conservation and Development Rules, 1988, and the Environment Protection Act, 1986, through its 17 offices in different parts of the country. Rule-breakers are issued a letter for violation and given 45 days to make things right. In case a miner’s response is unsatisfactory, a show-cause notice is issued, giving him another 30 days for rectification.

But IBM is more of a paper tiger. In 2012-13, it started prosecution proceedings against only 23 errant mine owners and collected a paltry penalty of Rs30,000. In the last four years, it took in only Rs1,70,800 as penalty from about 5,000 mine owners — an average of Rs34 per owner.

Nityanand Jayaraman, an environmental activist, says the report makes it clear that the agency does not have much control over mine owners because despite being told to mend their ways, many don’t bother to do so. He explains that corporate firms find it cheaper to pay a piffling penalty for violating rules than set aside a much larger budget to follow them to a tee.

The controller general’s office of the IBM did not respond to repeated calls.

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement