Kerala Chief Minister V D Satheesan has written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi seeking reconsideration of provisions in the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, raising concerns that the legislation could weaken the constitutional and financial powers of states. In his letter, Satheesan flagged provisions dealing with the taxation of mineral rights and mineral-bearing land, arguing that the changes would place restrictions on powers currently exercised by states. The Chief Minister sought the Prime Minister’s urgent intervention, warning that the amendments could have significant implications for mineral-bearing states such as Kerala.
A central concern raised by Satheesan relates to the proposed Section 9D, which places conditions on states’ ability to impose taxes, cess and other levies on mineral rights or land containing mineral deposits.
Under the provision, such levies would be subject to conditions or restrictions prescribed by the Central government.
Satheesan argued that subordinating the states’ taxation powers to conditions determined by the Centre would amount to an encroachment on constitutionally granted powers.
The Chief Minister also objected to provisions dealing with mineral-bearing land, expressing concern that they could lead to greater central control over areas that otherwise fall within the jurisdiction of states.
Satheesan warned that the amendments could have serious financial consequences for Kerala, which has significant mineral deposits.
Any restriction on the state’s ability to generate revenue from mineral-bearing land could affect not only the Kerala government’s finances but also the revenues of local self-government institutions, he said.
The legislation also contains provisions affecting certain pending tax liabilities. Satheesan raised concerns over the proposed invalidation of taxes, cesses and other levies that had not been deposited with or recovered by state governments before the commencement of the amended law.
Kerala has maintained that such changes could deprive states of revenue legitimately due to them.
The Chief Minister also invoked the Supreme Court’s 2024 judgment concerning the taxation of mineral rights to support Kerala’s position.
He pointed out that the apex court had held that royalty paid on mining rights was not a tax. Satheesan also referred to Entry 50 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, which deals with the states’ power to levy taxes on mineral rights, subject to limitations imposed by Parliament.
He further cited the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Entry 49, arguing that states have the authority to levy taxes on mineral-bearing land based on the quantity or value of minerals extracted.
Satheesan maintained that the latest amendment could curtail these constitutionally recognised fiscal powers.
The letter follows Kerala’s decision to strongly oppose the amendments to the mining law.
The state government has argued that the changes have wider implications for India’s federal structure because they alter the balance of powers between the Centre and states over taxation and mineral resources.
The issue has also drawn support across Kerala’s political divide. Opposition leader Pinarayi Vijayan has backed the state government’s objections and raised concerns over the potential impact of the legislation on Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd.
Kerala has indicated that it is prepared to examine both political and legal options to protect the state’s interests.
The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, amends the principal legislation enacted in 1957.
The government has maintained that the changes are intended to provide long-term stability to the mining sector, improve efficiency, attract investment and strengthen India’s ability to meet growing demand for minerals, particularly critical minerals.
The Lok Sabha passed the legislation without discussion amid Opposition protests, before it subsequently cleared Parliament.
Kerala, however, maintains that the changes concerning taxation and mineral-bearing land require reconsideration because of their potential impact on state finances and constitutional powers.
Satheesan has now urged Modi to intervene and address the concerns before the new provisions reshape the existing Centre-state framework governing mineral resources.