Political Slugfest Erupts Over Mineral Amendment Bill In Jharkhand

Ranchi: After Jharkhand chief minister Hemant Soren wrote to Prime Minister Narendra Modi seeking reconsideration of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, state BJP president Aditya Sahu accused the state government of misleading people and using the issue for political gains.

In his letter to Modi, Soren contended the proposed restrictions on states' mineral taxation power "raise serious constitutional, fiscal, developmental and federal concerns, adding that mining revenue accounted for 84.9 percent of the state's non-tax revenue in 2024-25. He said the state's Mineral Bearing Land Cess, enacted in 2024, was expected to generate around Rs 11,000 crore annually.

He also wrote a letter to the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, pointing out the financial implications of the Bill and urging him for his support. Jharkhand's main objection is the proposed Section 9D of the MMDR Act, which restricts state governments from imposing taxes, cess or other levies on mineral rights and mineral-bearing lands except under conditions prescribed by the Centre.

BJP counters Jharkhand government's stand

Hitting back at the CM, Sahu contended that the issue of cess concerned the entire country and that the amendment sought to bring uniformity to the system.

Referring to the broader “One Nation, One Tax” approach, he said the move would put an end to what he described as “loot in the name of cess”.

Sahu said the MMDR amendment would be a positive step towards building a developed India and would make the mining sector more competitive, transparent, predictable and investor-friendly.

“The legislation will promote investment, production, manufacturing, infrastructure, employment, energy security, national security and self-reliance,” he added.

Also Watch:

Centre's role in mineral taxation

BJP leader claimed that the amendment did not take away the states’ rights over land and minerals, nor did it abolish any tax imposed or collected by states on minerals.

“The Centre is not preventing state governments from imposing taxes. Rather, the amendment provides that state governments can levy taxes, cess or other surcharges in accordance with rules prescribed by the Centre to ensure uniformity and stability in the mineral sector,” Sahu said.

He claimed that the amendment would have no impact on the royalty received by mineral-rich states or on revenues from the District Mineral Foundation (DMF) and the National Mineral Exploration Trust (NMET).