SUMAN K SHRIVASTAVA
Ranchi, May 13: The scams committed by IAS officer Pooja Singhal, who called shots in both the Raghubar Das and Hemant Soren Governments, have brought into focus again how the massive mineral resources have proved to be a curse for Jharkhand time and again.
Jharkhand, having 40 per cent of the country’s mineral resources, had been formed in 2000 after a fairly popular movement for separation from Bihar. The expectation was that this separation would lead to an effort at the development of some sort, like the increase in building roads, and provision of education and health facilities, and so on. But that clearly has not happened.
The mineral resources continued to be exploited by politicians and bureaucrats for enriching their own purse instead of the State coffer.
Beginning from the fodder scam, though unearthed in 1996 in undivided Bihar, Jharkhand was the epicentre of this scam involving powerful politicians and bureaucrats.
After the creation of Jharkhand, the BJP appointed Babulal Marandi as the first chief minister of Jharkhand. But he was replaced soon in 2002 as the corrupt ministers built up a pressure on the BJP to throw him out.
Thereafter, the mining scam committed during Madhu Koda’s tenure (2006-08) as chief minister rocked Jharkhand. Koda’s government had been backed by the Congress and the JMM.
In the Madhu Koda case, politicians and bureaucrats had a source of funds based on the state’s massive mineral resources and industrial potential. They could get a share of the rents or super-pro?ts by using its powers to issue licences, granting mining leases etc.
Notably, it is the well-known phenomenon of the resource curse, particularly observed in failed African states: the ruling elite can earn large sums from leasing natural resources, whether for oil or diamonds and does not have to depend on collecting taxes from its subjects for personal and state income.
The point of the resource curse is that the manner of making money is related to granting leases and other favours to the corporate sector.
The investigation of Madhu Koda and state of?cials too for possible illegally acquiring funds in connection with mining leases, seems to provide the answer to a question with regard to all the Jharkhand governments so far.
This pattern continued, as alleged by the JMM, during the Raghubar Das regime also. The alleged irregularities, committed during Momentum Jharkhand, a summit held by the Das government to lure industrialists, are also under investigation by the Anti-Corruption Bureau.
When the Das government was thrown out of power, the rush to mint money by politicians and bureaucrats continued under the JMM-Congress government. It is said to be spurred by the fact that they required funds to fight the BJP electorally and stay in power in Jharkhand. For example, a JMM leader said that the party has not forgotten how it was not able to save the government, headed by Shibu Soren in 2005 just because of a resource crunch.
But, they adopted the traditional way of capital formation as they did not trust anyone. They got the mining lease in their own name and formed companies for exploiting the mineral resources and getting other government contracts. And this open move to earn extra money emboldened their trusted bureaucrats also.
According to one estimate, the mining department could earn over Rs 100 crore every month just to issue challans for the transportation of minerals. Also, it collected a hefty sum in granting mining leases and licences and allowed the lease holders to plunder the State’s mineral resources.
Besides, it had a hefty share of the funds generated by illegal mining going on unabated across the State, particularly in Santhal Pargana.
Suspended Mining Secretary Pooja Singhal, during questioning by the Enforcement Directorate, is said to have revealed how the mining department minted money and shared it with “ek raj neta”.
But then, even during undivided Bihar, Jharkhand faced the brunt of the freight equalization policy of the Central Government.
Under the freight equalization policy, 1952, the Centre subsidized the transportation of minerals to a factory set up anywhere in the country. The policy hurt the economic prospects of mineral-rich Jharkhand, a part of Bihar.
The policy weakened the incentives for private capital to establish production facilities in the state. As a result of the policy, businesses preferred setting up industrial locations closer to the coastal trade hubs and markets in other parts of the country.
So, despite having mineral resources and fertile land, Jharkhand, earlier southern part of the erstwhile Bihar, could not make the desired progress.
