SRINAGAR: Nearly three months after house committee of legislators unanimously recommended revocation of the controversial SRO-105, the state government on Wednesday formed a cabinet sub-committee to “deliberate” what the panel had recommended and submit its report by the end of November.
“Sanction is hereby accorded to the constitution of a Cabinet Sub-committee to deliberate on the recommendations of the House Committee with regard to SRO-105 dated 31.03.2016,” reads a government order issued here by the GAD.
The members of the CSC include Abdul Rehman Veeri (PDP), Minister for Public Works and Parliamentary Affairs. , Chander Parkash (BJP), Minister for Industries and Commerce , Abdul Haq Khan (PDP), Minister for Rural Development & Panchayati Raj and Law & Justice, Ch. Lal Singh (BJP), Minister for Forest, Ecology & Environment, Haseeb A. Drabu (BJP), Minister for Finance, Culture and Labour & Employment and Sham Lal Choudhary, Minister for PHE, Irrigation and Flood Control.
“The Committee, to be serviced by the Industries & Commerce Department, shall submit its report by the end of November, 2016,”
The house panel had held that the SRO-105 was in gross violation of the J&K constitution and state subject laws.
The controversial notification evoked widespread protests during the Budget session with MLAs cutting across party lines demanding its revocation.
In its report, the 14-member panel headed by NC legislator Muhammad Akbar Lone had concluded that J&K Minor Mineral Concessions, Storage, Transportation of Minerals and Prevention of Illegal Mining Rules (SRO-105 of 2016) was violating all laws protecting interests of the State subjects.
“SRO-105 is in gross violation of the Constitution of J&K, Land Alienation Act, State Subject Law, Transfer of Property Act and Land Grants Act,” reads the report presented in the House in the lesgilative assembly.
In the report, the committee had stated that permanent residents of the State have exclusive right over immoveable property in the State.
It had referred to state subject order of 1927, section 6 of J&K Constitution, Article 370 and 35-A of Indian Constitution, in support of the claim.
The panel had also noted that Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act 1970, does not impinge upon the exclusive rights of permanent residents of J&K over the immoveable property within the State.”
“The rights of permanent residents have to be respected while framing Rules in exercise of powers section 15 and 23(C) of the Act,” the report states.
The committee had observed that SRO-105 “ignores and disregards the constitutional and statutory imperatives relevant to grant of prospecting license, mining lease, quarry license and other minor mineral concessions”.
“It (SRO-105) deprives the permanent residents of the State of their rights. In other words, it throws open mineral concessions within the State, to non-permanent residents,” the report of the panel reads.
The committee has pointed out that the Apex Court judgment (Deepak Kumar versus State of Haryana) is not concerned with the right to claim minor mineral concessions. “The judgment, therefore, shall not be used as a cover to deprive the permanent residents of the State what rightfully belongs to them,” the report said.