By Our Correspondent
BHUBANESWAR: Jharkhand headquarters K.N. Ram & Co, aka ATHA Group , has not paid around Rs 19,90,86,433 towards compensation demanded and payment collected for violation of U/s Sec 21(5) in Roida II Iron Ore Mines in Keonjhar. Recently, the Roida II Iron Ore Mines of K.N. Ram & Co, aka ATHA Group was news for manipulating iron ore grade after auction in 2020. The Company also facing penalty for it.
This information was shared by Odisha Steel and Mines, Transport Minister Bibhuti Bhusan Jena while replying to Congress MLA Tara Prasad Bahinipati in Odisha State Assembly,
Minister Jena informed that Lease holder of Roida II Iron Ore Mines , K.N. Ram & Co, aka ATHA Group did not deposit a single rupees towards compensation demand for violation of MP/CTO, Interest paid on compensation for violation of MP/ CTO and Balance Recovery MPCTO is zero.
The Minister Jena further said , zero amount received towards total amount paid as compensation (forMP/ CTO) and applicable Interest while Status of compensation demand & applicable interest for MP/ CTO is nil.
The Minister said, a total of around Rs 19,90,86,433 towards Compensation demanded and Payment Collected for Violation of U/s Sec 21(5) in Roida II Iron Ore Mines in Keonjhar not paid by previous Lease holder K.N. Ram & Co, aka ATHA Group.
Both the Justice MB Shah Commission and Central Empowered Committee of the Supreme Court imposed penalty on Lease holder K.N. Ram & Co, aka ATHA Group. but the company yet to pay the amount to Odisha Government.
K.N. Ram & Co, aka ATHA Group was a major player in Odisha mining scam and violated Mines and Minerals Act, Mines and Minerals Regulation Act of 1957’s section 21. The company involved in illegal mining, theft and transportation. The company has violated pollution control act of 1986, air pollution control act of 1981, water pollution control act of 1974 and forest rights act of 1980.
Companies were supposed to extract mining with clearance of air and water pollution control under various acts like Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and consent to operate under the Water (PCP) Act, 1974 and Air (PCP) Act, 1981. Action should have taken against the company under Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and Odisha Forest Act-1972 and Mines and Minerals Act.
The Company was accused of violating Rule 37 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (now amended) which bars the transfer of control of a lease without prior government approval. Section 6 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 requires any further grant, in excess of the 10-km limit, to be approved by the state but it also floated by the company.
