Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren has warned the coal companies of putting barricades around coal mines if due payment of worth Rs 1.36 lakh crore is not cleared to the state by Central PSUs.
"We have demanded payment of Rs 1.36 lakh crore (dues) to the state from the coal companies, and we will take it, this is State's right otherwise we will put barricades around coal mineral resources," the Chief Minister said in his speech in the Legislative Assembly on Friday.
Soren had raised the issue of non-payment of dues by coal companies to the Centre in a letter to Union Coal and Mines Minister Pralhad Joshi dated March 2, 2022.
"Inspite of repeated consultations held with @CoalMinistry & @NITIAayogregarding non payment of long standing legitimate dues of Rs 1.36 lakh crores related to mining done by Central PSUs, Govt of India has paid no heed so far. I have written to @JoshiPralhad ji in this regard", tweeted Soren on Saturday.
Noting that Jharkhand is a mineral-rich state and that the socio-economic development of the State mainly depends on the revenue from these minerals, Soren in his letter said that after the nationalization of the coal, most of the coal mining is done by subsidiaries of Coal India Limited (CIL) but these coal companies are not paying legitimate demand of revenue to the State resulting in huge dues to the state from these companies.
"At present, the CIL subsidiary coal companies in Jharkhand are paying royalty on the basis of run-of-mine coal rather than processed coal being despatched. Several demand notices had been raised by the concerned District Mining Officers to the CIL subsidiary coal companies in respect of washeries of Rajrappa, Piparwar, Kathara, Swang, Kurgali, Moonidih and Mahuda collieries," the letter read.
"However, CCL/BCCL are yet to pay the same resulting in significant loss of revenue collection for the State," it stated further adding that the coal companies moved to High Court, Ranchi over the issue and the court had then had passed an interim order directing State Government "for not taking any coercive action." However, it later ruled in favour of the state.
( With inputs from ANI )
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor