TEAM HERALD
teamherald@herald-goa.com
PANJIM: The main contention of the affidavit filed by the state government before the Supreme Court is that Shah Commission report has erred in its valuation of illegal mining in Goa, putting the blame squarely on the Global Positioning System for inaccurate measurements, thereby justifying the mining carried out earlier.
According to the Shah Commission there was a Rs 35,000 crore revenue loss due to illegal mining; while Manohar Parrikar, then Leader of Opposition and chairman Public Accounts Committee put the revenue loss at Rs 4,000 crore.
The affidavit strongly argues to vacate the interim ban on mining, transportation and export of ore pointing out that most of the illegalities pointed out by the Shah Commission of Inquiry were during the period 2006-11, which falls during the seven to eight year period of the previous regime.
Shah Commission report observed that there is a large difference between the production and dispatch and that the production exceeded the permitted amount “… and this excess difference has been conveniently shown as ‘ore retrieved’ from the old dumps, causing huge loss to the government exchequer is far from the truth.”
The affidavit chooses to explain the difference between production and the dispatch by claiming that this was mainly because of non compilation of data as per the yearly returns in which there is scope for showing dump handling.
“This fact would have been easily clarified had the opportunity of being heard, been given to the respective mine lease holder before arriving at any conclusion,” the affidavit states. Besides this it also goes on to speak about the ‘apprehensions’ about illegal mining, stating,
“… apprehension has been expressed that this gap between the production and the exports in a year suggests rampant illegal mining followed by export/sale without payment of statutory dues. The apprehensions are without basis…”
But then it admits that there could be ‘certain revenue leakages’ and promises to ascertain this by an external audit, which is proposed to be undertaken.
The affidavit goes on to say that it is “not prudent” to pick up sale/export and production in isolation and then attribute mismatch to illegal production and sale, causing loss of revenue to the state or a scam justifying that the difference could be ore brought in from outside the state and that export from the state does not include ‘local produce’ during the year.
Promises to undertake detailed audit of all working leases by involving CAs and geological experts to assess over extraction or otherwise and based on the audit, appropriate action shall be taken.
Despite tall claims of having safeguards and commitment to protection of the environment, the affidavit surprisingly states that there is “no law in the country that prohibits working below ground water table” and that if the deposit exists below ground water table and it is economically viable for extraction, then anybody can work below that by following certain procedures.”
The state government’s affidavit also justifies this by saying that “Goa receives an annual rainfall of 3.5m to 4.0m. Therefore the ground water recharging is ‘very fast’ and the effect of mining below the ground water table is also minimum.”
The affidavit defends mining below water table saying that it would be unfair to state that mining in Goa should be restricted to a depth that does not go below the water table. It would be an impossible condition and would amount to indirectly banning all mining in Goa.
The government claims that it has already resolved to appoint an expert agency to undertake detailed EIA of mining operations in Goa and the study inter-alia also goes into damage to aquifer and the impact on water table and the water recharge, quality of water etc.
