LoP Naveen Patnaik and Sambalpur MP and former Union Minister Dharmendra Pradhan
Bhubaneswar: Sambalpur MP and former Union Minister Dharmendra Pradhan has strongly hit back at former Odisha Chief Minister and Leader of Opposition Naveen Patnaik over his opposition to the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026 (MMDR Amendment Bill-2026), accusing him of making misleading claims about the interests of Odisha.
Patnaik had recently issued a video message opposing the proposed legislation and alleged that the Centre was attempting to take away Odisha’s rights over its mineral resources. Responding through a video message, Pradhan said political differences were acceptable, but misleading people by withholding facts was not.
“Politics has its own place, but hiding the truth and misleading the people of Odisha is not acceptable,” Pradhan said, accusing Patnaik of attempting to derive political mileage from the issue.
Pradhan described the proposed MMDR amendments as a significant step towards strengthening India’s mineral security and protecting the long-term economic interests of mineral-rich states such as Odisha.
He said states had earlier imposed multiple forms of taxation on mining operations, resulting in a cumulative burden on the sector. According to Pradhan, Section 9D of the proposed MMDR framework seeks to establish a clear ceiling on the overall tax burden, while retaining the core revenues accruing to the states.
He argued that the measure would prevent excessive and overlapping taxation from making mining operations financially unviable. Pradhan further claimed that the legislation would help remove concerns over the closure of mining and industrial units in mineral-rich districts such as Keonjhar, Sundargarh, Jharsuguda, Angul and Jajpur, thereby safeguarding employment and livelihoods dependent on the mining and industrial sectors.
Pradhan also warned against imposing what he described as arbitrary taxes of 70-80 per cent on minerals.
According to him, such a tax burden could sharply increase the prices of iron, coal and cement, affecting supply chains, industries and infrastructure development. He said higher input costs could also make housing construction and the purchase of motorcycles, trucks and tractors more expensive for middle-class families in Odisha.
The proposed legislation, he claimed, would protect consumers from such inflationary pressures while ensuring that states continue to receive their legitimate mineral revenues.
Rejecting allegations that Odisha would lose financially because of the Bill, Pradhan said the state would continue to receive 100 per cent of auction premiums, royalty and District Mineral Foundation (DMF) contributions due to it.
He argued that a uniform mining taxation framework across the country would improve the ease of doing business, promote greater predictability for the mining sector and strengthen the financial position of mineral-producing states.
Pradhan also said our MPs had supported the legislation because of what he described as its potential benefits for the mining sector and the wider economy.
A major part of Pradhan’s response focused on Odisha’s mining revenue before and after the mining reforms introduced by the Narendra Modi government. Recalling Odisha’s mining revenue figures, he said the state’s annual mineral revenue was around Rs 1,000 crore in 2004 and had increased to approximately Rs 5,000 crore by 2014.
Pradhan attributed the subsequent sharp rise in revenue to mining-sector reforms introduced by the Modi government. He pointed to the 2015 amendments to the MMDR Act, under which the government made auction-based allocation of mineral resources mandatory, replacing discretionary allocation with a more transparent system.
He also cited an increase in ad valorem royalty from 10 per cent to 15 per cent and the establishment of the District Mineral Foundation (DMF) mechanism for development and welfare activities in mining-affected areas.
“Because of these transparent policies, mineral revenue that had remained at around Rs 5,000 crore has increased tenfold and has now reached approximately Rs 50,000 crore,” Pradhan claimed. He added that Odisha had received around Rs 37,000 crore through DMF funds, describing the increase as a result of mining reforms undertaken by the Modi government.
To substantiate his argument, Pradhan gave an example involving iron ore. He said that if the average selling price of iron ore was Rs 3,000 per tonne, Odisha would receive approximately Rs 3,300 as auction premium, equivalent to 110 per cent of the sale value, along with Rs 450 as ad valorem royalty and Rs 45 towards DMF.
Together, these components would result in around Rs 3,795 per tonne flowing into the Odisha government’s treasury, he said. Pradhan questioned whether the rise in mineral revenue should be viewed as a gain for the Centre or for the state, arguing that the reforms had substantially strengthened Odisha’s own revenues.
Pradhan also criticised the BJD over its references to the Orissa Rural Infrastructure and Socio-Economic Development Act, which the party has cited in its argument over mining taxation.
He said the legislation was introduced by the BJD government in 2004 and was struck down by the High Court in 2005. According to Pradhan, the matter remained pending before the Supreme Court from 2006 until 2024, during which, he alleged, the then state government failed to take effective action.
The BJP leader also challenged Patnaik to examine the economic record of his 24-year tenure before criticising the Modi government. Pradhan said Odisha’s total debt stood at around Rs 18,000 crore in 2000, when Patnaik assumed office, with per-capita debt at approximately Rs 6,000.
By 2024, he claimed, the state’s total debt had risen to more than Rs 96,000 crore, while per-capita debt had increased to around Rs 26,000. “Is this Naveen Babu’s economic reform?” Pradhan asked, questioning the financial management record of the previous government.
Pradhan also invoked Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s emphasis on the development of eastern India and Odisha, saying the Prime Minister had consistently focused on the region since his 2014 Independence Day address.
He urged Patnaik not to mislead young people over the future of Odisha’s mining sector and challenged him to explain specifically how the MMDR Amendment Bill would harm the state. Instead of making what he described as politically motivated allegations, Pradhan called upon the BJD leader to present his views on how the legislation would affect Odisha’s revenues, industries, employment and economic interests.
