PANAJI: The three-member Cabinet Advisory Committee which met for the first time on Wednesday, decided to recommend to the Chief Minister to file a review petition in the Supreme Court in a bid to clarify certain aspects of the order, especially regarding the shutdown date.
The belated decision which comes a day before the mines in Goa are to be shut indefinitely, will, in all likelihood, seek legal advice from an advocate other than Additional Solicitor General Atmaram Nadkarni, given that he has indicated that he is disinclined to adopt any option other than auctions.
“We have taken only one decision that we would go ahead with filing a review petition in the Supreme Court. If we have to take this review petition forward we need… the attorney general is there… taking his opinion or somebody of his level,” PWD Minister Ramakrishna “Sudin” Dhavalikar said.
“We are going for a very non-biased senior counsel. The first choice would be the advocate general or somebody of his stature who needs to convince the SC that the application of this order cannot happen in a flash. 15th March which is decided by the SC. What is its relevance (of the date)? It is difficult to understand. Why not March 31? Why not one month from February 7? Many things are there to be clarified. We are there to protect the interest of the sons of the soil and mining its the backbone of Goa’s economy,” Vijai Sardesai told reporters.
“The cabinet advisory committee is actually advising the CM to take this decision. It is not that we are deciding this. It will be conveyed to the CM,” Dhavalikar countered when asked when the final outcome of their ‘recommendation’ to the Chief Minister would be made known.
“It will be made known by evening,” he said.
“The debt relief scheme has to be extended that we have also advised,” Dhavalikar added.
“Besides that, we have recommended to form a committee of the affected MLAs and assess the loss which every person of every area. That process will start. The chairman will be a from the mining area,” Dhavalikar said.
When asked whether he expected there to be a law and order problem, Sardesai said:
“Basically we expect the people to cooperate because the people are aware that this is not of our making. This is not a made-in-Goa problem.”
“Government is of the people, where is the question of law and order,” Dhavalikar chipped in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AG advises against
filing review plea
PANAJI: Goa’s Advocate General has advised against filing a curative petition in the Supreme Court in a bid to bring some form of temporary relief to those affected by the mining ban.
The Advocate General’s opinion which was put before the Cabinet Advisory Committee which met on Wednesday says that “there is no reason why the State government should be giving a largesse to the existing mining leaseholders instead of conducting an auction in term of the provision of the MMDR Act as any diversion may put the state government in a bad light.”
The Advocate General, who says his opinion is concurrent with that of the Additional Solicitor General Atmaram Nadkarni, has said that the earlier government opted for lease renewals only because of the order of the Bombay High Court at Goa.
“There is a Supreme Court decision to take immediate steps for grant of fresh mining leases and it will be a completely useless exercise to file a curative or review petition as there is a reliance on the Shah Commission’s report, Vishwanathan Committee report and the ongoing inquiry by the SIT and a team of chartered accountants,” the AG Dattaprasad Lawande said in his opinion.
The AG has instead suggested that the state government file an interim application seeking permission for transportation of old dumps to provide the relief to the mining-dependent people. He has, however, warned that the court may direct the government to transport the dumps and not the mining companies.
“The stopping of mining operations means that all operations and at the most the leaseholder may be permitted to remove plant and machinery after March 16, 2018. No fresh extracted ore can be removed from the leases. However, the royalty paid mineral taken out before March 15 would legitimately belong to the leaseholder,” the AG has said.
Effects of mining ban since 2012:
* There were over 12,000 trucks deployed on the mines in the State.
* The government has given financial aid to 7,078 truck owners out of the 9,327 applications filed by truckers.
* The government also gave subsidy to waive off thousands of crores in loans for around 4,500 trucks through OTS.
* Financial assistance was given to 1,974 people who lost their jobs due to the mining ban. No decision was taken on the application filed by hundreds who lost their jobs.
* Loans taken by tipper trucks, machinery, barges and other mining related businesses in 2012 was over Rs 800 crore. This includes loans from nationalized banks, cooperative banks and societies in the State. About Rs 375 crore was taken from from 42 cooperative banks and societies in the State. The loans were availed for tipper-trucks (Rs 164.61 crore), barges (Rs 98.64 crore) and other businesses related to mines (Rs 112.36 crore).
Revenue collected by the government
after lifting the 2012 mine ban:
* Till March 2017, Rs 544 crore collected from various sources of mineral resources
*By June 30, 2017, Rs 637 crore collected from various recoveries.
*Rs 795. 93 crore collected from 89 mining companies through stamp duties during renewal of mines.
*About Rs 800-900 crore earned through e-auction of minerals.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have taken only one decision that we would go ahead with filing a review petition in the Supreme Court--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Sudin Dhavalikar
