National Mineral Policy 2006 - Department of Mines

concerned State Government (or other authority) as well as other concernedand/or aggrieved parties of being heard.Furthermore, the Committee suggests that the third proviso of Rule 63A of the MCR 1960should be deleted and a new Rule 54A should be added as indicated below:54A: Where the State Government (or other authority) has not passed an order underRule 63A:(a)(b)(c)for a non-exclusive RP within four months from date of receipt of anapplication of RP,For a PL/LAPL within ten months from the date of receipt of anapplication for PL, andFor a ML within 13 months from the date of receipt of an application forML,the aggrieved party may apply to the Central Government to exercise its powers underSection 30 of the MMDR Act within 90 days of the expiry of the periods mentionedabove.2.20 The Committee is of the view that the amendments proposed in the previousparagraph would not take away or whittle down the powers of state governments in respect ofminerals owned by them. Instead they would only serve to secure adherence to the time limitsalready set and imposed under the existing law. The Committee also recommends thatnecessary change should be made in the laws to provide that where the Centre does not grantprior approval in cases referred to it by the state government within the specified period, suchprior approval should be deemed to have been granted. Further, in the applications receivedunder Section 30 of the Act in situations in which no order has been made by the stategovernment there should be a time limit imposed on the Centre for disposal of the applicationwithin such time limit. A solution should also be found to ensure that the Centre adheres tothe time limit.2.21 During the deliberations of the Committee, doubts were raised on the constitutionalvalidity of the proposal to amend Section 30 of the MMDR Act. In making its60