Question map
With reference to the management of minor minerals in India, consider the following statements : 1. Sand is a 'minor mineral' according to the prevailing law in the country. 2. State Governments have the power to grant mining leases of minor minerals, but the powers regarding the formation of rules related to the grant of minor minerals lie with the Central Government. 3. State Governments have the power to frame rules to prevent illegal mining of minor minerals. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Explanation
The correct answer is option A (statements 1 and 3 only).
Sand mining is the process of removal of sand and gravel where this practice is becoming an environmental issue[1], and sand is indeed classified as a minor mineral under Indian law. The District Collector is assigned the responsibility of granting environment clearance up to 5 hectare of mine lease area for minor minerals, mainly sand[2], confirming statement 1 is correct.
Statement 2 is incorrect because while State Governments do grant mining leases for minor minerals, the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules for regulating the grant of quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions in respect of minor minerals[3]. This shows that the power to frame rules for minor minerals lies with State Governments, not the Central Government.
Statement 3 is correct as State Governments have the power to make rules regulating minor minerals, which inherently includes preventing illegal mining. A provision has been made for constitution of special courts by the state governments for fast-track trial of cases related to illegal mining[4], demonstrating state-level authority in combating illegal mining activities.
Sources- [1] Environment, Shankar IAS Acedemy .(ed 10th) > Chapter 6: Environmental Issues > 6.2 SAND MINING IN INDIA - ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES > p. 113
- [2] Environment, Shankar IAS Acedemy .(ed 10th) > Chapter 6: Environmental Issues > Guidelines for Sustainable Sand & Minor Mineral Mining > p. 115
- [3] https://www.ielrc.org/content/e5705.pdf
- [4] Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 14: Infrastructure and Investment Models > Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act 1957: > p. 429
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Full viewThis is a classic 'Federalism Trap' question. UPSC exploits the confusion between the regulatory framework for Major Minerals (Centre-dominated) and Minor Minerals (State-dominated). While standard books cover the definition of sand, the specific legal division of rule-making power (Section 15 vs Section 13 of MMDR Act) requires reading the 'Acts & Policies' chapters with a focus on administrative jurisdiction, not just environmental impact.
This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.
- Statement 1: Under India's management of minor minerals, is sand classified as a "minor mineral" under prevailing law?
- Statement 2: Under India's management of minor minerals, do State Governments have the power to grant mining leases for minor minerals?
- Statement 3: Under India's management of minor minerals, does the Central Government have the power to make rules relating to the grant of mining leases for minor minerals?
- Statement 4: Under India's management of minor minerals, do State Governments have the power to frame rules to prevent illegal mining of minor minerals?
- Document title explicitly links 'Sand' with 'Minor Mineral Mining' and provides guidelines for their joint governance.
- Describes district-level environmental clearance, monitoring and transit permit systems that treat sand within the minor-mineral regulatory framework.
- Karnataka 'Minor Mineral Concession' rules specifically transfer oversight of sand mining to a state department, using the minor-mineral regulatory instrument.
- State-level rules and procedures (bidding, pricing, exemptions) are applied to sand, showing administrative treatment as a minor mineral.
- Reference to a Supreme Court order prohibiting sand mining without requisite clearances demonstrates legal/regulatory control over sand extraction.
- Implied requirement of environmental/legal clearances aligns sand with regulated minor-mineral activities.
- Explicitly states State Governments grant mineral concessions/rights for all minerals within the State under the MMDR Act, implying authority over minor minerals.
- Links the grant of mineral rights to State-level action subject to Central permission, showing primary devolved role to States.
- Specifies that mining leases are granted by respective State Governments through auctions and competitive bidding.
- Highlights State role in granting leases and removing discretion, reinforcing State authority in lease allocation.
- Describes district-level authorities (headed by District Collector) responsible for environmental clearance for minor-mineral mine lease areas up to 5 hectares, indicating local/state administrative control over minor-mineral leasing processes.
- Shows procedural and regulatory responsibilities for minor minerals reside with district/state institutions, supporting State-level management.
- States that Sections 5 to 13 do not apply to quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions in respect of minor minerals.
- Sections 5–13 include the Central Government's rule-making powers for mineral concessions, so their non-application indicates those Central powers do not extend to minor minerals.
- Explicitly records that Sections 5 to 13 do not apply to minor minerals.
- States that the State Government may make rules "for regulating the grant of quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions in respect of minor minerals", showing rule-making power resides with States.
- Audit report summarizes Section 15 as empowering State Governments to make rules for regulating the grant of quarry leases and mining leases for minor minerals.
- Reinforces that rule-making for grant of mining leases in respect of minor minerals is a State power, not Central.
Says 'Regulation of mines and mineral development' is on the Union List and that the Central Government frames rules and regulations regarding development and extraction of minerals.
A student could combine this rule with the constitutional division of subjects to check whether 'minor minerals' fall within central rule‑making powers or are delegated to states.
States are described as the authority that grant Mining Leases through competitive bidding, indicating lease‑granting is primarily a state function.
Use this pattern to assess whether central rule‑making would be limited to overarching regulation while lease grants remain a state prerogative for minor minerals.
Notes that the Central government has powers to intervene where state governments do not pass orders within prescribed timelines.
Students could infer that the Centre may have conditional or supervisory rule‑making or intervention powers affecting leases when states fail to act.
Shows district‑level authorities (DEIAA/DEAC) play a role in granting environment clearance for minor mineral leases (up to 5 ha), highlighting decentralised functions.
Combine this with the Union/State division to argue that procedural or environmental rules could be state/district responsibilities, limiting central rule scope over actual lease grants.
Gives an example of a State (Karnataka) making specific rules/administrative changes for sand (a minor mineral), showing states actively regulate minor mineral leasing/oversight.
A student can use such state examples to test whether central rules exist in practice or whether states predominantly regulate grant of minor‑mineral leases.
- Makes 'Regulation of mines and mineral development' a Union List subject but explicitly entrusts state governments with mining-related activities (except coal, petroleum, atomic).
- States are identified as owners of in-state minerals and have authority over related taxation/royalty, implying operational control at state level.
- Cites state-level rulemaking: Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules 2011 changed oversight of sand mining.
- Gives an example of a state (Andhra Pradesh) issuing a specific sand-mining policy, showing states frame rules for minor minerals.
- Provides that state governments can constitute special courts for fast-track trials of illegal mining cases.
- Notes Central can intervene where states fail to pass orders within prescribed timelines, implying primary state responsibility to act.
- [THE VERDICT]: Trap. Statement 2 is the killer—it describes the procedure for 'Major Minerals' but applies it to 'Minor Minerals'. Statement 1 is a standard textbook fact.
- [THE CONCEPTUAL TRIGGER]: Resource Federalism (Polity) overlapping with Economic Geography (Mineral Laws).
- [THE HORIZONTAL EXPANSION]: Memorize the distinction: Major Minerals (Coal, Iron, Uranium) = Centre makes rules, State grants leases. Minor Minerals (Sand, Clay, Stone) = State makes rules AND grants leases. Note the 31 minerals reclassified as 'minor' in 2015 (e.g., Gypsum, Bentonite, Chalk). Know Section 23C (State power to curb illegal mining).
- [THE STRATEGIC METACOGNITION]: When studying any Act (MMDR, Forest Act, Water Act), always draw a 2x2 matrix: Who owns the resource? Who makes the rules? Who implements/grants leases? Who collects the revenue? If you only read the 'environmental issues' of sand mining without the 'legal framework', you will fail this question.
States own and manage mineral extraction within their boundaries, including minor minerals such as sand.
High-yield for questions on centre–state division of powers and resource federalism; links legal-administrative control of natural resources to environmental and economic policy. Mastering this helps answer questions on mineral governance, state policy variation, and regulatory responsibility.
- Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 14: Infrastructure and Investment Models > 14.11 Coal, Coal Mines Act 2015 and MMDR Act 2015 > p. 427
State rules and national guidelines group sand with 'minor minerals' and apply minor-mineral concession and monitoring mechanisms to sand mining.
Crucial for questions on mining law, resource classification, and implementation of sustainable extraction practices; connects to administrative procedures, pricing, and local governance measures.
- Environment, Shankar IAS Acedemy .(ed 10th) > Chapter 6: Environmental Issues > Current rules and policies in operation relation to sand mining > p. 114
- Environment, Shankar IAS Acedemy .(ed 10th) > Chapter 6: Environmental Issues > Guidelines for Sustainable Sand & Minor Mineral Mining > p. 115
Sand mining is subject to environmental clearances and district-level monitoring to curb illegal extraction and mitigate environmental harm.
Important for questions on environmental governance, judicial intervention, and implementation of regulatory safeguards; links legal safeguards to on-ground monitoring and enforcement mechanisms.
- Environment, Shankar IAS Acedemy .(ed 10th) > Chapter 6: Environmental Issues > 6.2 SAND MINING IN INDIA - ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES > p. 113
- Environment, Shankar IAS Acedemy .(ed 10th) > Chapter 6: Environmental Issues > Guidelines for Sustainable Sand & Minor Mineral Mining > p. 115
State Governments have the statutory role to grant mineral concessions and leases within state boundaries under the MMDR framework.
High-yield for polity and resource governance questions: explains federal distribution of mineral rights, links to state finances and resource management, and helps answer questions on mining leases and legal competence.
- Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 14: Infrastructure and Investment Models > 14.11 Coal, Coal Mines Act 2015 and MMDR Act 2015 > p. 427
- Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 14: Infrastructure and Investment Models > Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act 1957: > p. 428
Central government permission and powers to intervene complement State authority in mineral concession processes.
Important for understanding centre–state relations in resource governance; useful for essays and mains questions on federalism, concurrent responsibilities, and legal safeguards against inaction by states.
- Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 14: Infrastructure and Investment Models > 14.11 Coal, Coal Mines Act 2015 and MMDR Act 2015 > p. 427
- Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 14: Infrastructure and Investment Models > Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act 1957: > p. 429
District Collectors and district-level committees handle environmental clearances and local allocation procedures for minor minerals (e.g., sand).
Practical for questions on implementation and ground-level regulation of mining; links administrative geography, environmental regulation, and decentralised governance; aids case-based answers on sustainable mining and local institutions.
- Environment, Shankar IAS Acedemy .(ed 10th) > Chapter 6: Environmental Issues > Guidelines for Sustainable Sand & Minor Mineral Mining > p. 115
- Environment, Shankar IAS Acedemy .(ed 10th) > Chapter 6: Environmental Issues > Current rules and policies in operation relation to sand mining > p. 114
Regulation of mines and mineral development is a subject placed on the Union List, giving the Centre legislative authority over mining regulation.
High-yield for UPSC because it clarifies division of legislative powers between Centre and States; links to federalism, Centre-State legislative conflicts, and constitutional lists questions. Useful for questions on which level of government can frame rules or make laws on resource management.
- Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 14: Infrastructure and Investment Models > 14.11 Coal, Coal Mines Act 2015 and MMDR Act 2015 > p. 427
- Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 7: FEDERALISM > FEDERALISM WITH A STRONG CENTRAL GOVERNMENT > p. 161
Offshore Minerals: While States own minerals within their land boundaries, the Central Government is the exclusive owner of all minerals underlying the ocean within the Territorial Waters or the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of India.
The 'Administrative Bottleneck' Logic: Statement 2 suggests States grant leases but Centre makes the rules for *minor* minerals (like local sand/clay). In Indian administration, 'Minor' subjects are rarely centralized to that extent. If the resource is local (sand), the rule-making is almost always devolved to the State to ensure ease of administration. The split authority described is characteristic of strategic/major resources, not minor ones.
Mains GS-3 (Internal Security & Environment): Illegal sand mining is not just an environmental issue; it funds 'Sand Mafias' which is a Law & Order issue (State List). This explains why Section 23C empowers States to frame rules for preventing illegal mining—it's a policing function.