Why is Odisha's BJD Upset Over the Early Adjournment of the Assembly?

The Biju Janata Dal (BJD) has voiced strong criticism against the Odisha government for adjourning the assembly session prematurely, alleging a lack of interest in discussing the amended mining law. The party claims that the new legislation could lead to significant financial losses for the state. BJD leaders have vowed to intensify protests and engage the public on this critical issue, while the BJP counters that the amendments will benefit Odisha. This political clash raises questions about governance and legislative transparency in the state.

By Narendra Chaudhary Sep 29, 2026, 23:00 IST

BJD's Criticism of Odisha Government's Assembly Adjournment

Bhubaneswar: The Biju Janata Dal (BJD) has expressed strong disapproval of the Odisha government's decision to adjourn the monsoon session of the assembly four days early, criticizing the lack of debate on the revised mining legislation. The party accused the ruling BJP of showing a lack of interest in discussing the matter.

The BJD has pledged to escalate its protests against the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2026, which they argue undermines the authority of states to impose taxes on mineral rights and land.

During a press briefing at the BJD's state headquarters, party leaders, including MLA Arun Kumar Sahoo and former minister Tukuni Sahoo, thanked the public for their overwhelming support during a mass protest held on Monday.

In a statement, the BJD condemned the state government's choice to close the Odisha Legislative Assembly prematurely without addressing the demand for a discussion on the MMDR Amendment Act.

The party suggested that the ruling government might be intimidated by the significant public backing for their call to repeal the MMDR Amendment Act.

BJD spokesperson Lenin Mohanty warned that the amended law could lead to substantial financial losses for Odisha, estimating a potential loss of ₹1 lakh crore in pending tax dues from mining operations, along with an annual revenue loss of around ₹12,000 crore due to the new regulations.

In response, the BJP refuted these claims, asserting that the MMDR Amendment Act would ultimately benefit the state rather than harm its revenue.

Arun Kumar Sahoo from BJD stated that they had proposed a motion for discussion in the assembly, but the BJP showed no willingness to engage in debate.

He accused the state government of being fearful of the public's support for the BJD's demand to repeal the mining law, leading to the early adjournment of the assembly.

Sahoo lamented the missed opportunity for a discussion on such a crucial issue, emphasizing that the MMDR Amendment Act directly impacts the state's interests.

He confirmed that the BJD would not remain passive and would initiate a statewide movement regarding this issue.

Conversely, BJP MLA Tankadhar Tripathy claimed that the government was ready to discuss the matter raised by the Congress but alleged that opposition parties disrupted the assembly proceedings. He assured that the government is open to discussions on any topic in a proper manner.