Dharmendra Pradhan questions Naveen over letters seeking lower bauxite conversion factor

Bhubaneswar, Oct 5 (UNI) BJP MP and former union Minister Dharmendra Pradhan on Monday questioned former Odisha Chief Minister and Leader of Opposition Naveen Patnaik over his alleged attempts to get the conversion factor for bauxite reduced, asking why the previous BJD government had sought to extend what he termed undue benefits to a particular private company.

Reacting to the Odisha High Court's recent ruling in a case relating to bauxite supply and the MMDR Act, Pradhan, in a post on X, alleged that the previous BJD government had created a route to favour private companies by ignoring the state's financial interests. Pradhan said the High Court had rejected the claim of a particular private industrial company seeking 150 million tonnes of bauxite supply, which was allegedly assured by the BJD government in 2004. The court, he said, had made it clear that old assurances relating to natural resources could not override prevailing laws.

He said that following amendments to the MMDR framework and Rule 45 of the Mineral Conservation and Development Rules (MCDR), 2016, a conversion factor was applied to the average sale price of bauxite. This resulted in the price of bauxite increasing from Rs 750 to Rs 1,707 per tonne, he claimed.

According to Pradhan, the revised mechanism benefited the Odisha Mining Corporation (OMC) and could have generated thousands of crores of rupees in additional revenue for the state through royalty, District Mineral Foundation (DMF) and National Mineral Exploration Trust (NMET) collections.

However, Pradhan alleged that the then Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik had written separate letters to the Centre on February 1, 2020 (Letter No. 1044) and October 7, 2020 (Letter No. 8569/SM), seeking reduction of the conversion factor and implementation of the minimum price sought by the private company.

Pradhan alleged that the Centre had rejected the request and questioned the rationale behind seeking a review of a rule that, according to him, was financially beneficial to Odisha. "Why did you seek a review of a rule that was highly beneficial to the state? In whose interest and to benefit whom did you take such a step?" Pradhan asked Patnaik. He also questioned whether the prolonged outstanding dues of around Rs 5,400 crore from a particular private company was the result of an erroneous decision of the previous government.

Pradhan alleged that the issue raised questions about whether the state's interests had been compromised to extend undue benefits to a private company and sought an explanation from Patnaik. He also accused the BJD and Patnaik of repeatedly misleading the people of Odisha on the MMDR Act and the state's natural resources.

"The people of Odisha are not so gullible that they will accept a lie as truth if it is repeated again and again," Pradhan said, urging Patnaik to accept the facts and stop providing what he described as misleading information. Pradhan said the recent High Court ruling had brought the issue into sharper focus and demanded that Patnaik explain the circumstances behind the letters seeking a reduction in the conversion factor and the actual purpose behind the move.

UNI DP