Seeking a complete review of the de-allocation policy, country's leading electricity producer, NTPC Ltd has urged the Coal Ministry to review the decision to cancel allocation of three coal blocks and restore their previous status.
Interestingly, the decision to de-allocate the coal blocks has been taken despite an assurance given by the Coal Minister, Sriprakash Jaiswal that he would look into the request of the Power Ministry not to cancel the coal blocks of the maharatna company. Mr. Jaiswal is currently abroad.
Seeking to back its claim that it had already set in motion the process for development of the three coal blocks, that have been de-allocated, NTPC Ltd chairman and managing director, Arup Roy Choudhary in a letter to Coal Secretary, C. Balakrishnan said his company had obtained all the statutory clearances, acquired land and incurred substantial expenditure in developing these blocks. "NTPC is already going ahead with the engagement of a Mine-Developer-cum-Operator for carrying out land acquisition and other infrastructure activities in these blocks,'' the letter pointed out.
The Power Ministry, Joint Secretary, I.C.P. Keshari has already written to the Coal Ministry to review its decision to de-allocation Chhatti Bariatu, Kerandari and Chhatti Bariatu (South) blocks of NTPC Ltd.
On the issue of de-allocation of two other coal blocks — Brahmini and Chichro-Patsimal, senior officials in NTPC said these two blocks were jointly allocated to Coal India Limited (CIL) and NTPC under a 50:50 joint venture partnership. ``If the cancellation letter has been issued to NTPC, why such an action has not been initiated against CIL which is equally responsible for developing these blocks,'' the official questioned? NTPC has already invested over Rs. 150 crore for developing these blocks.
NTPC is already locked in a war of words with CIL on its proposed power plant in the North Karanpura coalfields. While NTPC is going ahead with its plans to set up 1,980 MW super thermal power plant here, the Coal Ministry has protested against it arguing that it would render at least six billion tonnes of the fuel of CIL impotent for any use.
