Tamil Nadu Government Introduces Retroactive Quarrying Regularization Scheme
The Tamil Nadu government has unveiled a significant one-time scheme designed to regularize instances of excess and illegal quarrying operations across the state. This policy, which carries a retrospective effect from April 6, 2015, aims to address long-standing violations by imposing financial penalties rather than pursuing criminal prosecution.
Penalty Structure and Regulatory Framework
Under the newly issued government order, penalties will be levied based on a weighted average seigniorage fee rate, which has been set at Rs 25 per metric tonne. The scheme establishes a clear distinction between different types of violations. For quarrying activities that exceeded the permitted limits within legally leased areas, the regularization will require payment of twice the seigniorage fee as a compounding charge. This is in addition to the standard one-time seigniorage fee and other mandatory statutory levies.
In cases where quarrying occurred in areas without any valid leasehold, the penalties are substantially higher. Operators will be required to pay five times the seigniorage fee to regularize these illegal operations. The government has also stipulated that failure to pay these penalties will result in the imposition of penal interest at a rate of 24% per annum, adding a significant financial deterrent against non-compliance.
Mandatory Drone Surveys and Committee Recommendations
A key component of the new regulatory measures is the mandatory requirement for drone surveys of all existing quarry leases. These surveys must be completed within a strict six-month timeframe. According to official data, drone surveys have already been conducted in 904 out of the state's total 1,845 rough stone quarries, indicating substantial progress in monitoring and assessment.
The regularization scheme itself was developed based on recommendations from a committee led by retired bureaucrat K Allaudin. This committee was constituted in 2023 following representations from the quarrying industry seeking a resolution to longstanding compliance issues. The government's order explicitly states that the one-time regularization scheme will remain valid for a period of two years from its commencement date, providing a defined window for operators to come into compliance.
Activist Opposition and Legal Concerns
Despite the government's intentions, the scheme has faced immediate and strong opposition from transparency advocates and environmental activists. Arappor Iyakkam, an organization dedicated to governance accountability, has formally complained that the regularization approach is arbitrary and illegal.
Jayaram Venkatesan, convenor of Arappor Iyakkam, has specifically criticized the scheme for contradicting the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulations) Act of 1957. "The existing legislation mandates recovery of the full cost of extracted minerals and allows for criminal prosecution with penalties of up to five years imprisonment," Venkatesan stated. "Instead, this order effectively legalizes all illegal mining by requiring payment of only two times the minimal Rs 25 per tonne seigniorage fee as penalty, with zero recovery of mineral costs and complete abdication of the government's responsibility to pursue criminal action against illegal miners."
Venkatesan has directly appealed to Chief Minister M.K. Stalin for intervention, alleging that "the government order is yet another attempt to further enrich and protect the illegal mining mafia" operating in the state. Activists are demanding complete withdrawal of the regularization order and calling for strict criminal action against all illegal mining operations, along with the immediate closure of quarries found to be in violation of regulations.
Scope and Application of the Scheme
The regularization scheme applies comprehensively to all documented instances of excess or illegal quarrying for which demand notices or show cause notices have already been issued by authorities. This retrospective application means that violations occurring over nearly a decade are now eligible for regularization through financial penalties rather than legal prosecution.
The government's approach represents a significant policy shift in how Tamil Nadu addresses resource extraction violations, prioritizing revenue collection through penalties over criminal enforcement. The coming months will likely see continued debate between industry stakeholders seeking operational certainty and activists demanding stricter environmental and legal accountability.
