In the last few days, politics in Andhra Pradesh has been all about sub-standard or adulterated laddus. There is nothing really new about politics being mixed with gods and goddesses, playing with the sentiments of crores of devotees. But this time it is over the use of adulterated ghee for making laddus which are offered as prasad.

There was a similar controversy, about sub-standard ghee being used for making prasad, involving the famous Ambaji Temple in Gujarat, too. Ask anyone from the trade and industry and they will say “ghee adulteration” is rampant in India.

Incidents like this raise certain questions: Who is responsible for it or where does this all begin? Is it the processing units or weakness in the procurement mechanism of the institutions? Is there enough regulatory mechanism in place? Why should such situations arise at all? What is the way forward?

According to Rupinder Singh Sodhi, President of the Indian Dairy Association and former Managing Director of Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd, “ whenever such an incident happens everybody starts commenting on who has gone wrong — the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has not done its work or such-and-such institution hasn’t worked. But to avoid or minimise such happenings the whole supply chain has to take the responsibility.”

Right from milk producers (mainly dairy farmers), processors/manufacturers, retailers (general as well as organised trade, including online category) to consumers — retail consumers and institutions like temples, gurudwaras, caterers, etc — are all responsible, he said.

Sodhi has a point here, and similar sentiments were echoed by some of the major processors/producers of ghee.

What also needs to be brought into focus is the entire procurement process which institutions such as TTD had been following so far — though it is a e-tendering process it is based on the L1 model. If one goes by what players in the market have to say, pure ghee cannot be cheap; whoever is selling at a low price is definitely selling a sub-standard product.

Farmers affected

When rampant adulteration takes place, it also impacts dairy farmers’ income as they do not get their due price. For instance, if the real cost of producing 1 kg of ghee is ₹550 a kg and somebody after adulteration starts selling at ₹345, ₹350 or ₹400, then the farmer will be forced to reduce the real cost to compete with the adulterated produce.

It is a different story that with a good monsoon, green fodder prices are lower at ₹250/quintal against ₹350 in Haryana APMCs, currently.

But overall, if the Indian farmer is not able to get the real price for the produce it is because of the rampant adulteration happening across India by mischievous brands.

Says Sodhi, “As far as farmers are concerned, individually a farmer cannot do anything to avoid such happenings, but there are farmers’ cooperatives. They have to become more vigilant and bring to the notice of the authorities if such incidents come to light. Ultimately, if anything happens to any product segment in the dairy industry, it impacts everybody, not only the farmers.”

But, dairy processing units have a larger responsibility as incidents like this impact the reputation of the industry and the players, too. “They have to be very careful and vigilant about those bringing bad repute to the industry,” Sodhi said.

Considering that ghee is a commonly used ingredient in most Indian households, what can the regulators do? How can the guilty be punished? Agencies such as FSSAI and other labs should be more vigilant.

According to Sodhi, “as far as FSSAI is concerned they are regulating but they need to be more vigilant through their field forces to take such type of samples and test them. Also, the role of NABL, CALF Lab or the other acclaimed food laboratories is to keep educating FSSAI on the latest techniques of testing food products like, in this case, ghee.”

Finally, the buyer, whether individual or institutional, also has a big responsibility. Both have to be extra vigilant as such an essential food item as ghee does not come cheap, Sodhi added.

Procurement process

As for institutional buyers, they should not go for only open type of bidding, Sodhi said, adding that “they should first register manufacturers of ghee who have got a good track record and whose products have also been tested immediately after entering the market.”

Bids, it is argued, should not be for one- or two-year contracts. If you go for yearly contract, it is possible that prices go up during the course of the contract period, nudging the ghee manufacturer to indulge in adulteration to protect margins.

“Therefore, bidding should be called for from reputed suppliers who are registered, on monthly or bi-monthly basis,” Sodhi said.

For example , following the incident, TTD has opted for a new procurement process for pure ghee from recognised companies. Currently, the ghee is being purchased at ₹478/kg from suppliers like Nandini and Alpha Milk Foods. The ghee undergoes testing in NDDB and NABL-accredited labs for additional verification. A lab panel is also being formed. The FSSAI will soon establish a central lab to further ensure product safety. Those found selling substandard ghee have been blacklisted.

However, there is another option for procuring ghee, according to Sodhi. The institutions can procure from a reputed auction platform like National Cooperative Dairy Federation of India (NCDFI). This will ensure competition and only reputed brands are allowed to be sold.

Finally, the entire value chain has to be in-place — from farmers and processing facilities to retailers and the end consumer, whether individual or institution. Regulations can be in place but what is desired is more awareness and advocacy about the ill-effects of adulteration across the value chain.

Related Topics