Mizoram Government Incurs Significant Loss in Ginger Procurement for 2025
In a recent session of the Mizoram state legislature, Agriculture Minister PC Vanlalruata revealed that the government has suffered a substantial financial loss exceeding Rs 128.38 crore in ginger procurement activities during the year 2025. This disclosure came in response to inquiries from opposition members, highlighting concerns over the state's agricultural support initiatives.
Financial Details of the Procurement Loss
The minister provided detailed figures, stating that the government expended a total of Rs 1,41,16,84,410.5 on purchasing ginger at support prices through primary and secondary collection centres across Mizoram. However, revenue generated from sales to empanelled buyers amounted to only Rs 12,78,07,290, resulting in the reported deficit. This significant gap between expenditure and income underscores the challenges faced in the state's agricultural marketing efforts.
Investigation into Malpractice Allegations
Addressing questions from BJP member K Beichhua and other opposition legislators, Vanlalruata clarified that no funds were lost due to malpractice or corruption. He explained that irregularities were detected in July of the previous year, prompting the Mizoram Agriculture Marketing Board (MAMB) to establish a Special Investigation Team (SIT). The SIT conducted visits to four secondary collection centres located in Champhai district, which borders Myanmar.
Key Findings from the Investigation:
- The SIT uncovered attempts by certain individuals to purchase ginger at low prices from farmers and then resell it at higher rates through the SCCs by registering on the official portal.
- The affected centres include Farkawn, Khuangleng, Cold Storage New Champhai, and Ramhrangkawn, all situated in Champhai district.
- Importantly, these discrepancies were identified and corrected before any payments were processed, effectively preventing any misappropriation of government funds.
Implications and Government Response
This incident highlights the vulnerabilities in agricultural procurement systems and the need for robust oversight mechanisms. The minister's assurance that no financial loss occurred due to malpractice provides some relief, but the overall loss of over Rs 128 crore raises questions about the sustainability of such support price schemes. The government's proactive steps in forming an SIT and addressing irregularities before fund release demonstrate a commitment to transparency and accountability in public spending.
As Mizoram continues to navigate its agricultural policies, this case serves as a critical lesson in balancing support for farmers with fiscal responsibility, ensuring that future initiatives are better safeguarded against potential risks and inefficiencies.
