BJD claims BJP MPs jeopardised Odisha’s mining revenue with law changes

The Biju Janata Dal (BJD) has lodged a formal complaint that members of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) compromised Odisha’s financial interests by endorsing recent amendments to the national mining law. In an affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court, Advocate General Pitambar Acharya asserted that the state is legally entitled to roughly ₹1 lakh crore in pending mining royalties and that any delay in receiving the sum would inflict a “substantial financial loss” on Odisha. The filing, cited by The Hindu, also quoted BJD MP Santrupt Misra, who accused the BJP lawmakers of siding with mining companies at the expense of the state’s revenue.

The contested amendments aim to streamline the extraction process and relax certain environmental clearances, a move championed by the central government as a boost to the nation’s mineral output. Critics, however, argue that the changes dilute state control over mineral concessions and could reduce the share of royalties that resource‑rich states like Odisha receive. By supporting the revisions, the BJP legislators, according to the BJD, effectively undermined the state’s negotiating power with private mining firms.

Odisha, home to some of India’s largest iron ore and bauxite deposits, has long been a flashpoint in the centre‑state tussle over mining policy. The state’s mining sector contributes significantly to its economy, supporting thousands of jobs and generating a sizable portion of its fiscal revenue. Past disputes have seen the Supreme Court intervene to settle royalty arrears and enforce environmental safeguards, underscoring the delicate balance between encouraging investment and protecting state interests.

The current controversy arrives as the central government pushes a broader agenda to attract foreign investment in the mining sector, promising faster clearances and higher production targets. While industry groups welcome the reforms, state leaders warn that without adequate safeguards, the benefits could accrue primarily to corporations, leaving states with diminished fiscal returns. The outcome of the Supreme Court’s review will likely set a precedent for how much authority states retain over their mineral wealth under the revised legal framework.

If the court upholds the BJD’s position, Odisha could secure the claimed ₹1 lakh crore, reinforcing its fiscal base and signaling to other resource‑rich states that they can successfully contest central policy changes. Conversely, a ruling favoring the amendments may embolden further centralisation of mining regulation, potentially reshaping revenue streams across India’s mineral‑dependent regions.