Purushottam Patra, Gariaband. The fact that production was affected due to less rainfall was not hidden from anyone. Because even before the commencement of procurement, people of more than 45 villages of Devbhog had gathered at their respective procurement center level and demanded that apart from not selling paddy, the area should be declared drought. Farmers of procurement centers Jhiripani, Jhakharpara, Khokhsara are still firm on their demand, till now they have not sold the paddy. But farmers sold paddy in large numbers in the procurement centers of other affected villages, Dewanmuda, Nishtiguda, Sinapali, Ghumarguda, Rohanaguda, Gohrapadar area. According to the annual report of the affected area, the average production of these areas is 11.9 quintals per acre. But in these centers paddy was sold at the price of 15 to 18 quintals.
According to the government report made three days ago, the farmers sold paddy at the rate of 17.12 quintals per acre in the procurement center Goharapadar, 14.82 quintals in Nishtikuda, 16.17 quintals in Dewanmuda, 17.23 quintals in Sinapali, 16.75 quintals in Rohanaguda and 18.15 quintals per acre in Ghoomarguda. Has taken the system by surprise.
Know how and why paddy was sold in large quantities
This time there was no loan waiver, the production was also low, hence the option of paddy availability due to low yield became the produce of Odisha. Amidst the heavy influx from Odisha, the system was breached due to some reasons due to which the paddy from outside was easily consumed in huge quantity.
First reason- Paddy was sold even on the area of maize.
Rukhram Nagesh, who sells paddy at the Goharapadar procurement centre, has a total land of 5.25 hectares (13.125 acres) in Goharapadar and Tuasmal. On the same land, Gohrapadar was purchased at the rate of 20 quintals per acre. The Center had earlier purchased 200 quintals of paddy, now a token of 60 quintals of paddy has also been cut for January 18 on the remaining area. When we matched with the revenue records, Rukhram could sell paddy only in 6.7 acres. Maize and dabri are visible in the remaining. Despite there being clear mention of crops in the records of Patwari and Tehsildar, it is a big question on the basis of which record the procurement center deducted the paddy token. According to Anavari report, the average production of the above two villages is only 9.7 quintals per acre. There is still evidence of maize sowing in half of Rukhram’s area. It is not just one farmer but if the investigation is done then the names of many people will come to light.
Second reason- After Girdawari, there were improvements in 308 areas.
According to the reports available in tehsil and procurement centers, even after the last date of Girdawari, there were amendments in 398 areas, mostly the same areas in which maize crop was mentioned. According to the records, 71 in Gohrapadar, 35 in Dewanmuda, 42 in Nishtiguda, 42 in Rohanaguda. In villages under 44, Latapara and Devbhog procurement centres, amendments were made on 54-54 acres. The surprising thing is that the Patwaris who did not enter the details of maize or the crop in the government records of Girdawari, kept calling it paddy. This important record affecting paddy procurement was solely dependent on the Patwari. Before the amendment, neither any proof nor any cross checking provision was kept, hence the mention of crop in area became arbitrary. Due to this also, paddy was being sold in non-paddy crop areas.
need for process improvement
Like the case in Devbhog tehsil, the figures of Amlipadar tehsil are also shocking. In fact, even though a maximum provision of 21 quintals has been made in the purchase plan. But apart from the Girdawari report, area wise production data should also be upgraded in the system and a provision should be made to fix the quantity of purchase in proportion to the production. Due to its shortage, people are seen trying hard to bring produce from other states to compensate for the prescribed quantity in low production areas. Due to this the government treasury is suffering loss.
What do you mean by responsible?
In the revenue records of Gend Lal Sahu, Tehsildar Devbhog Rukhram, both the crops are mentioned as much as they were mentioned at the time of Girdawari. Paddy has been purchased in the maize area due to irregularities at the committee level itself, which will be investigated. As far as Girdawari is concerned, the Tehsildar’s ID is amended only after the Patwari’s amendment. The entire responsibility for the amendment lies with the Patwari.