← 17 September 2026's Current Affairs · Economy GS-2 Prelims ★★★★★ Mains ★★★★★
States raise concerns over Mines and Minerals Amendment provisions
Why in News?
States can tax mineral rights beyond royalty: the MMDR Amendment fight over the Concurrent List
State governments have flagged that amendments to the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act reduce their control over mineral resources and royalty revenue.
Why it matters: asked in UPSC 2025; GS-2 core; factual, Prelims-type
What you need to know
2 min read
State governments have raised concerns that recent amendments to the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 curtail their control over mineral resources and royalty-linked revenue.
Mining and mineral development fall in the Concurrent List, but the Act gives the Union government significant power to regulate mining leases and auction critical minerals.
States argue that provisions allowing the Centre to notify and auction blocks for strategic and critical minerals reduce their say over resources within their territory.
The Supreme Court has previously held that State governments can levy taxes on mineral rights in addition to central royalty.
Sources: The Hindu · Topper IAS editorial
Key facts
Remember these
- Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 governs mining leases and mineral regulation in India
- Mining and mineral development is placed in the Concurrent List of the Constitution
- Recent MMDR amendments let the Union government notify and auction blocks for strategic and critical minerals
- States argue this reduces their control over mineral resources within their territory and royalty-linked revenue
- The Supreme Court has held that State governments can levy taxes on mineral rights in addition to central royalty
Prelims · Mains
How the exam will ask it
Prelims
- Mining and mineral development falls under the Concurrent List of the Indian Constitution.
- The MMDR Act, 1957 empowers the Union government to regulate mining leases and auction critical minerals.
- The Supreme Court has upheld the power of State governments to tax mineral rights in addition to royalty paid to the Centre.
Mains
This issue falls under GS Paper 2 (Polity/Centre-State Relations). The MMDR Amendment's provisions letting the Centre notify and auction critical mineral blocks have reduced States' say over resources within their territory, straining fiscal federalism given that mining is a Concurrent List subject. A cooperative approach involving revenue-sharing formulas and consultative auction mechanisms is needed to balance national strategic mineral needs with State resource rights.
PYQ connection
A question UPSC has already asked on this
Consider the following statements: I. India has joined the Minerals Security Partnership as a member. II. India is a resource-rich country in all the 30 critical minerals that it has identified. III. The Parliament in 2023 has amended the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 empowering the Central Government to exclusively auction mining lease and composite license for certain critical minerals. Which of the statements given above are correct?
- I and II only
- II and III only
- I and III only
- I, II and III
Show answer
Answer: C
Why this matters: today's issue is directly connected to a concept UPSC has already tested. Read the story with this question in mind.
Practise this PYQ →Quick recall
Answer before you reveal
Mining and mineral development, the subject of recent Centre-State friction over the Mines and Minerals Amendment, falls under which List of the Constitution?
- Union List
- State List
- Concurrent List
- Residuary powers
Show answer
Answer: C — Mines and minerals development is placed in the Concurrent List, which is why both the Centre's amendments and State-level rules on mining can come into tension.
Convert this topic into marks
Today's 10-MCQ test · instant analysis · Powered by AdaptIQ