Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6804f10aa910a-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6804f10aa910a-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6804f10aa910a-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4696,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 10 December, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam/articleshow/7073831.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4787,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4696,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Mining,Corruption&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4696,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 10 December, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam/articleshow/7073831.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4787,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 4696
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Mining,Corruption&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&quot;&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court's strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party's spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&quot; Tiwari said.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&quot; said Srivastava.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no previous mining experience&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant's financial worthiness&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Background note:&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &quot;unsustainable in law&quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&quot;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6804f10aa910a-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6804f10aa910a-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6804f10aa910a-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4696,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 10 December, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam/articleshow/7073831.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4787,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4696,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Mining,Corruption&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4696,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 10 December, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam/articleshow/7073831.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4787,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 4696
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Mining,Corruption&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&quot;&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court's strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party's spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&quot; Tiwari said.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&quot; said Srivastava.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no previous mining experience&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant's financial worthiness&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Background note:&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &quot;unsustainable in law&quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&quot;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6804f10aa910a-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6804f10aa910a-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6804f10aa910a-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6804f10aa910a-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4696,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 10 December, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam/articleshow/7073831.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4787,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4696,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Mining,Corruption&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4696,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 10 December, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam/articleshow/7073831.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4787,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 4696
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Mining,Corruption&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &amp;quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court&#039;s strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party&#039;s spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &amp;quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&amp;quot; Tiwari said.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&amp;quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &amp;quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&amp;quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &amp;quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&amp;quot; said Srivastava.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no previous mining experience&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant&#039;s financial worthiness&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Background note:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &amp;quot;unsustainable in law&amp;quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&amp;quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&quot;&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court's strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party's spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&quot; Tiwari said.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&quot; said Srivastava.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no previous mining experience&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant's financial worthiness&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Background note:&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &quot;unsustainable in law&quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&quot;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 4696,
		'title' => 'Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&quot;&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court's strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party's spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&quot; Tiwari said.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&quot; said Srivastava.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no previous mining experience&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant's financial worthiness&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Background note:&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &quot;unsustainable in law&quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&quot;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div>',
		'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 10 December, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam/articleshow/7073831.cms',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 4787,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 4696,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma',
	'metaKeywords' => 'Mining,Corruption',
	'metaDesc' => 'The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights...',
	'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&quot;&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court's strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party's spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&quot; Tiwari said.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&quot; said Srivastava.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no previous mining experience&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant's financial worthiness&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Background note:&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &quot;unsustainable in law&quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&quot;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 4696,
	'title' => 'Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&quot;&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court's strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party's spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&quot; Tiwari said.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&quot; said Srivastava.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no previous mining experience&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant's financial worthiness&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Background note:&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &quot;unsustainable in law&quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&quot;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div>',
	'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 10 December, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam/articleshow/7073831.cms',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'raman-govt-attacked-for-mining-scam-by-supriya-sharma-4787',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 4787,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 4696
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma'
$metaKeywords = 'Mining,Corruption'
$metaDesc = 'The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights...'
$disp = '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, &quot;it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?&quot;&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court's strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party's spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. &quot;Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm,&quot; Tiwari said.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&quot;This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?&quot; said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. &quot;If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats,&quot; said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. &quot;If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam,&quot; said Srivastava.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no previous mining experience&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant's financial worthiness&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">- the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Background note:&nbsp;</em></div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify">On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant &quot;unsustainable in law&quot;. In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:&quot;It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining.&quot;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

Raman govt attacked for mining scam by Supriya Sharma

The case of Pushp Steel and Mines reverberated in Chhattisgarh assembly, as the congress party attacked Chief Minister Raman Singh, asking him to divulge the name of the owner of the dubious firm that had been granted coveted mining rights in the state in violation of rules. The congress alleged the firm is covertly owned by a senior BJP leader. The persistent uproar finally led the speaker to adjourn the assembly indefinitely.  Earlier this year, TOI had extensively reported how a one lakh rupee firm, formed in Delhi on 2 June 2004, applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh the same day, and was recommended not just a prospecting licence but a mining lease for the multi crore mine in Kanker district. Cancelling the grant, on July 20 this year, Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court observed, "it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining... How could a company within a few hours of being incorporated in New Delhi ... submit an application in Chhattisgarh on that very day for grant of PL and also satisfy the criteria for grant of PL?"  For long, political circles in Chhattisgarh have conjectured that the firm was merely a front for powerful politicians. But the state congress failed to take on the BJP government over the case, despite the high court's strictures, till last week, battling ire over 2G spectrum scam, Manish Tiwari, the party's spokesperson in New Delhi, launched a counter attack on BJP, dredging out cases where its state governments were embroiled in scams. Pushp Steel and Mines was one of the cases he pulled out. "Chief Minister Raman Singh should name the senior BJP leader who owns the firm," Tiwari said.  Responding to the accusations, in a press statement, the chief minister sought to invert the arguement. The state government had merely recommended mining rights to the firm, he said, it was the congress government at the centre that finally cleared the grant. The centre had also given the firm coal blocks in Madhya Pradesh. This meant the firm possibly had the backing of senior congress leaders, Raman Singh claimed.  "This is a feeble defence. The central ministry of mines merely gives formal approval to the recommendations made by the state. Chhattisgarh government signed a 400 crore rupee MoU with this one lakh rupee firm and misrepresented it as a worthy company in its letter to the centre. The onus is on Raman Singh. Why is he hiding the truth?" said Mohammad Akbar, the Congress MLA, who spearheaded the attack on the government in the assembly.  The blame game, many believed, has at least exposed the rot in the system. "If you notice, no longer is anyone contesting the fact that this was an ineligible sham company. Whether it is the BJP or the Congress, everyone accepts that the only reason it managed to gain access to mineral resources was since it had the backing of powerful people in the government, whether politicians or bureaucrats," said Sudeip Srivastava, activist and lawyer.  As per the registrar of companies, Pushp Steel and Mines Limited is owned by two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, small time businessmen who are based in the Ajmeri Gate area of New Delhi.  Experts believe this case is symptomatic of how state governments have misused their discretionary powers to grant mining rights to unknown dubious firms floated with no serious intent to enter the minng sector, but merely to acquire mining rights and encash them by selling the company or its shares, to make quick windfall gains. "If investigated and exposed, the mining loot in the country in recent years will far outstrip the spectrum scam," said Srivastava.  Why Pushp Steel did not deserve a multi crore iron ore mine    - poor capital base, just one lakh rupees starting capital  - no previous mining experience  - no income tax returns, mandatory to show applicant's financial worthiness  - no major investment made in five years since it signed MoU promising to set up a iron ore based plant worth 465 crores  - the government had arbitarily cancelled the prospecting licence granted to a Nagpur based firm for the same mine since it had failed to set up a plant after two years of signing MoU  Background note:    As reported in TOI on 2 Aug 2010    On June 2, 2004, two brothers, Atul Jain and Sanjay Jain, pooled together Rs 1 lakh in Delhi to set up a company, Pushp Steel and Mines Ltd. The same day, the company applied for a prospecting licence for an iron ore mine in Chhattisgarh, more than 1,000km away. The company had zero experience and almost no capital - both pre-requisites for a licence. But the state government recommended it not just a prospecting licence (PL) but also a mining lease for several iron ore rich pockets in the Halahadi range in Kanker district. Five years later, Delhi High Court held the grant "unsustainable in law". In a detailed order, on July 20, 2010, Justice S Muralidhar observed:"It beats imagination how a company incorporated in New Delhi on June 2, 2004, could have on that very day submitted an application in Chhattisgarh for grant of PL. Second, it is inconceivable how such a company could be considered for grant of PL when the criteria laid down indicates that the applicant should have some prior experience in mining."