With wary eye on Pak, Union govt not keen to help MP; can Shivraj Singh Chouhan pull off what Narenda Singh Tomar failed to do as Union Agriculture Minister?

Surendra Prasad Singh.

Madhya Pradesh’s long-winding battle to join the band of Indian states recognised as Basmati rice-producing regions under the Geographical Indication (GI) framework is hitting obstacle after obstacle. Interestingly, the Union government itself is not keen on the move despite the fact that it’s a BJP-ruled state, and Madhya Pradesh has been pushing its cause at multiple levels at the Centre.

The Mohan Yadav government is lobbying aggressively for what it sees as the state’s fair share of the Gl tag. However, despite influential figures from Madhya Pradesh – like Narendra Singh Tomar and Shivraj Singh Chouhan – holding key positions in the Union Agriculture Ministry over years, the matter remains unresolved.

Currently, seven states – Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, (western) Uttar Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, and Delhi are recognised as Basmati-producing regions under the Gl framework. And Madhya Pradesh is not being let in.

Two-pronged challenge

When it comes to Gl tag for Basmati rice, the Centre faces challenges on two fronts. One, Madhya Pradesh wants to be included in the Gl tag. But, if the Centre allows it, it may be weakened in its stance against Pakistan’s recent expansion of claim over Basmati.

For, Pakistan poses the second challenge. Originally, 14 of its districts were recognised as Basmati-growing regions, but it subsequently expanded the area to 44 districts, including four in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). India has been fighting this action tooth and nail.

In 2022, Pakistan applied for the GI tag in the EU, prompting India to file objections and request its rejection. Unlike India, Pakistan does not publicly disclose Gl applications. This prevents India from gaining early knowledge of these developments. However, once Pakistan’s application was made public in the EU, India discovered Pakistan’s strategic maneuver and sought legal redress.

Countering Pakistan

Pakistan’s application includes a claim of cultivating Basmati in 44 districts, even listing regions like Balochistan, where rice cultivation is virtually impossible Adding districts in PoK has added fuel to fire.

India has officially objected to Pakistan’s application, emphasising that Basmati cultivation is traditionally limited to specific regions. In this context, If India now includes Madhya Pradesh as a Basmati-producing state, it could weaken its argument against Pakistan’s expanded claim.

Additionally, the Gl tag’s fundamental principle does not support Madhya Pradesh’s inclusion as a Basmati cultivation zone.

The Madhya Pradesh government has taken legal action, escalating the matter to the Supreme Court, which has now referred it back to the Madras High Court for reconsideration.

Joint effort

A 2008 joint India-Pakistan meeting on the Gl issue led to the formation of a study group comprising senior officials from both countries. It was decided that Basmati cultivation in Pakistan would be limited to 14 districts, and in India to seven states.

The meeting had also concluded that both countries would jointly apply for the Gl tag for Basmati. However, diplomatic tensions over the years have derailed this cooperation.

After Shivraj Singh Chouhan became Union Agriculture Minister last year, efforts to secure the Gl tag for Madhya Pradesh’s Basmati rice gained momentum.

At the state government’s request, the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI) was asked to provide its opinion. The Agriculture Ministry has since conducted two meetings on the matter.

MP fights on

During Narendra Singh Tomar’s tenure as Agriculture Minister in Modi’s second term, similar efforts were made to include Madhya Pradesh among the band of Basmati-producing states, but this did not materialise. The issue has now reached IARI via the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). The discussions continue.

Madhya Pradesh earlier sought Gl recognition through the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB, which was subsequently abolished). However, both the Indian government and Pakistan opposed its inclusion. After an unfavourable ruling from the IPAB, Madhya Pradesh approached the Madras High Court, but it failed to secure a favourable outcome there as well.

The case then escalated to the Supreme Court, where arguments were raised about states like Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, which have been designated as Basmati-producing regions despite the crop not being grown uniformly across their entire territories.

The Supreme Court, in response, referred the matter back to the Madras High Court, where it remains under review.

This article was originally published in The Federal Desh.

Published Date: February 3, 2025