KOLKATA (miningweekly.com) – The government of the western Indian coastal state of Goa has estimated that it is losing $214-million a month in revenues, following the closure of all iron-ore mines since March.
With neither the state, nor central government succeeding in ensuring resumption of mining operations by December, as planned earlier in the year, the Goa government said that the livelihoods of 250 000 people have been directly hit by the Supreme Court’s closure of the mines.
According to the government, 25% of the state’s economy has been impacted by closure of the mines, if total direct and indirect employment in the mining sector is taken into consideration.
A union of mining-dependent people states that about 5 000 workers directly employed in mines have been rendered jobless, while another 6 000 truck drivers have been benched indicating the spiraling impact on allied sectors.
All iron-ore mines in Goa was forced to down shutters from March 15, following an order of the Supreme Court in February this year, which held that lease renewals of all mines by the Goa government were illegal as such renewals were not through mandatory auction as laid down in the Mines, Minerals Development and Regulation Act 2015.
In a bid to force both state and central governments to ensure resumption of mining operations, about 3 000 people directly associated with mining industry are planning to lay siege to New Delhi from December 11, to coincide with the winter session of Parliament. It is expected that through their three-day sit-in in the capital attention from across the political spectrum will result.
Various allies of the Bharatiya Janata Party- (BJP-) led coalition Goa government on Monday claimed that the BJP, which also was the party in power in the central government, “lacked the political will” to get mining operations back on the rails and that the party would pay a price for inaction at the Indian national elections to be held in a few months’ time.
The central government last month ruled out any legislative changes to circumvent the apex court order claiming any legal amendments would not stand up to court scrutiny.