APMC
reforms crucial
Through
a first person narrative, Mr Phanse, brings to the table the issue
of the monopoly of APMCs in marketing of agriculture produce and
also calls for a parallel system in the entire marketing chain
The
story is not very old. Seven to eight months back, I met Babanrao,
a farmer from the Chakan region of Maharashtra. Babanrao had a small
two-acre farm and was traditionally an onion grower. However, he
had planted cucumber during that monsoon season. Considering me
to be a government official, he tried to show me a chit of paper.
The
story starts from his plans to plant cucumber. The rates in the
market and in the Chakan market yard, that is, in the Agricultural
Produce Marketing Committee (APMC) were soaring. He was able to
produce around 200 kg on his farm. In the retail market the rates
were around Rs 20 per kg. The net amount he expected from his sale
was around Rs 10 per kg and a total of Rs 1,950 (after deducting
Rs 50 as expenses). Babanrao did not carry, his entire produce to
the market but only about 50 kg of it. The rates in the market were
unusually low that day and he was desperate to sell his produce.
The rates were negotiated and a licensed trader in the APMC took
over the produce. As is the usual practice in the APMC Babanrao
was asked to collect the trade slip (Patti in Marathi) and the amount
mentioned on it, only the next day.
This
was the same chit of paper which Babanrao was trying to show me.
The slip, in effect, was saying that his produce was sold at Rs
5 per kg. After deducting weighing charges, labour charges, market
cess, commission and the others he (Babanrao) was liable to pay
the trader Rs 63. The deductions to be made from his sale exceeded
the sale price and the farmer was punished for selling his produce
in the Government controlled market and an Ulti Patti (Reverse Trade
Slip), that is, an obligation to pay in case of sale rather than
receive was slapped on the farmer.
How
could this happen? Had the trader cheated him? The trader was a
licensed trader of APMC and was bound by APMC rules and regulations.
The deductions, which the trader had shown on the slip, were factually
correct. This happened apparently, due to a peculiar provision in
the APMC regulations. It says that after the agriculturists have
brought their produce in the market area of APMC, they will have
to pay the expenditure to be incurred not only till the point of
auction of their produce but all expenditure incurred after the
auction till the buyer takes delivery of the produce.
The
Maharashtra Government had sought to introduce an amendment to this
Act a couple of years back and had issued orders to the effect that
the entire expenditure after the agriculturists brought their produce
in the market area would be recovered from the buyer and not from
the agriculturists. These orders by the Government were welcomed
by strikes and were strongly opposed by the traders of APMC. The
result was that the Government had to withdraw the orders.
The
second half-hearted attempt by the Government was the introduction
of an amendment through the Legislation Bill in the 2001. However,
the amendment was to the effect that the market fees and all other
charges till the point of sale were to be paid by the seller and
the market fees and all other charges after the point of sale by
the purchaser. This resulted in the matter being brought in front
of a Select Committee of Legislators. The Select Committee after
deliberations for two years gave a report that the implementation
of the above amendment does not seem possible and hence the practice
followed today is that the expenditure after the auction would also
be recovered from the seller.
.....CONTD
TO
READ FURTHER... SUBSCRIBE
TO YOUR COPY TODAY!!!
