logo
HC strikes down ban on notified hybrid paddy seeds, allows curbs on non-notified varieties

HC strikes down ban on notified hybrid paddy seeds, allows curbs on non-notified varieties

Indian Express2 days ago
In a relief to Punjab farmers and seed dealers, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday set aside the state government's blanket prohibition on hybrid paddy seeds, noting that 'the state lacked the power to ban notified varieties certified under the central law'.
Hearing three petitions, challenging the Punjab Agriculture Department's order issued on April 7, 2025, banning the cultivation of all hybrid and PUSA-44 varieties in that state, a single bench of Justice Kuldeep Tiwari, however, upheld the state's authority to restrict the use of non-notified hybrid seeds.
Justice Tiwari, at the same time, underlined that the state is well within its powers to act against non-notified hybrids. 'Seeds that are not notified under the Act of 1966 do not enjoy legal sanctity. Hence, their prohibition in Punjab is justified,' the order stated.
Clash of laws
In April, the Punjab government initially banned the cultivation of PUSA-44 and all hybrid paddy seeds through administrative orders, citing environmental concerns such as delayed maturity and excessive stubble residue, sparking a legal battle.
The state government argued that 'agriculture is a state subject and powers under the East Punjab Improved Seeds and Seedlings Act, 1949, allowed it to regulate seed use'.
The court, however, held that 'once Parliament enacted the Seeds Act, 1966, the 1949 law effectively lost relevance on overlapping matters. The 1966 Act governs the broader field and outlines the mechanism for seed regulation. Therefore, the state cannot issue conflicting directions against notified varieties'.
The Union government had also clarified that 'de-notification of a seed variety is possible only through the Central Seed Committee after giving the breeder or proponent a fair hearing'.
Farmers and the seed industry react
The ruling comes after weeks of uncertainty faced by Punjab's farmers when the sowing season is already over in the state. Farmers argued that hybrid seeds not only mature earlier but also save water and provide better returns than traditional Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) varieties.
'Hybrid seeds give us Rs 15,000 to Rs 16,000 more per acre and mature faster. We were in a fix because of the ban, but the court removed that confusion. Though the cultivation period this year has passed, it will be helpful next year,' said Jaspal Singh, a Patiala farmer who has been cultivating hybrid seeds for the past five years.
Welcoming the verdict, Federation of Seed Industry of India chairman Ajai Rana said, 'It restored the role of science in agriculture. The seed industry welcomes this progressive decision. Hybrid rice delivers 5-6 quintals higher yield per acre as compared to other varieties, has a shorter crop cycle, conserves up to 30 per cent water under Direct Seeded Rice practices and helps lower emissions, offering farmers a proven and sustainable pathway. All notified hybrids have undergone rigorous ICAR trials and meet national milling standards, including FCI's 67 per cent Out Turn Ratio. FSII member companies release hybrid rice as well as any new seed product after years of multi-location trials, screening for yield, biotics and abiotic stress tolerance, grain quality and milling standards.
'The recent episode, however, highlights how ad-hoc policy actions create confusion among farmers while depriving opportunity to plant high-yielding rice hybrids for higher income and disrupting the growth of the seed industry. Decisions must, therefore, be consultative and science-based to ensure confidence, stability and credibility. We remain committed to working with the Punjab government, central regulators and stakeholders to empower farmers with high-quality seeds and advanced biotech tools, while strengthening sustainability, groundwater conservation, and food security.'
While the court's decision clears the path for notified hybrids, it keeps intact the state's authority to block non-notified seeds. Agriculture experts say this means Punjab farmers will continue to have access to certified hybrids, but the state can still act against uncertified and unapproved varieties that do not meet national standards.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

States will be at whims of governor if nod to Bills withheld: Supreme Court
States will be at whims of governor if nod to Bills withheld: Supreme Court

Business Standard

timean hour ago

  • Business Standard

States will be at whims of governor if nod to Bills withheld: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that the power of the governor to permanently withhold assent to bills would leave the state government, which is elected with majority, at his 'whims and fancies'. 'Would we not be giving total powers to the governor to sit in over an appeal. The government elected with the majority will be at (the) whims and fancies of (the) governor,' Chief Justice of India(CJI), Justice B R Gavai, said. The court was hearing the maintainability of the reference made by President Droupadi Murmu under Article 143. The reference was concerning the April 8 ruling of the top court that set timelines for governors and the President to grant assent to bills passed by the legislature. In the April 8 judgment, a bench of Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan invoked its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to fix deadlines for the President and governors to act on state bills. Replying to the query of the CJI, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, told the Constitution Bench of CJI B R Gavai, Justice Surya Kant, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice P S Narasimha, and Justice Atul S Chandurkar that everyone derives power from the Constitution. On the powers of the governor under Article 200, Mehta said the governor has four options- assent to the bill, withhold assent, reserve the bill for consideration of the President or send it back to the legislature. He said that when the governor withholds assent, the bill falls through. Article 200 of the Indian Constitution outlines the governor's powers regarding assent to bills passed by the state legislature. If a bill is returned, the legislature can pass it again with or without amendments, and the governor is then bound to give assent. The bench, however, remarked that the governor has to communicate his or her decision and that the focal point of the debate would be whether withholding is temporary or permanent. Mehta said the power to withhold is to be used rarely and only in the first instance, as it leads to the death of the bill. 'The governor is not just a postman. He represents the Union of India, appointed by the President. The President is elected by the entire nation by way of the entire election and that is also a way of democratic expression,' Mehta said. After the April 8 judgment, the President invoked Article 143(1) of the Constitution of India to consult the Supreme Court. This Article, commonly referred to as the power of 'Presidential Reference', empowers the President of India to seek the Supreme Court's opinion on questions of law or fact of public importance. President Murmu, on May 13, posed 14 questions to the Supreme Court of India on several aspects of law, including the ambit of the powers under Article 142. In response, the states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu filed an application questioning the maintainability of the reference. It urged the Supreme Court to return the reference unanswered and said it was an attempt by the Centre to indirectly overrule binding judgments without disclosure. Meanwhile, the central government supported the reference, arguing that the power of governors and the President to act on bills cannot be bound by judicial timelines. The hearing will continue on Thursday.

Stay on KJ George, officials extended till Aug 28
Stay on KJ George, officials extended till Aug 28

Time of India

time2 hours ago

  • Time of India

Stay on KJ George, officials extended till Aug 28

Bengaluru: The high court extended till Aug 28 the interim stay on further proceedings before the special court in a complaint against energy minister KJ George and some Bangalore Electricity Supply Company (Bescom) officials. This is in connection with the July 17 private complaint filed by BJP functionaries alleging irregularities in issuance of a tender for procuring and installing smart electric meters across the state. Justice MI Arun, who heard the matter for some time, adjourned the hearing. You Can Also Check: Bengaluru AQI | Weather in Bengaluru | Bank Holidays in Bengaluru | Public Holidays in Bengaluru | Gold Rates Today in Bengaluru | Silver Rates Today in Bengaluru Apart from the minister, Mahantesh Bilagi, former managing director of Bescom and presently MD of Karnataka State Minerals Development Corporation, along with HJ Ramesh, director (technical), Bescom, have sought quashing of the private complaint registered for offences under Sections 314, 316, and 61 of BNS, 2023, and Section 13(1)(a) and 13(1)(b) of Prevention of Corruption Act. Three BJP MLAs — CN Ashwath Narayan, SR Vishwanath, and D Muniraj — had lodged a complaint with Lokayukta police in April. Subsequently, they filed the private complaint before the special court for elected representatives. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store