Subscribe
Punjab government has banned the cultivation of hybrid paddy and the popular Pusa-44 variety in an attempt to tackle the state’s worsening groundwater crisis and mitigate environmental damage. The decision, announced by the Agriculture Department on April 7, 2025, sparked controversy and is now under judicial review.
Two petitioners — the Patiala-based New Kisan Agro Agency and the Federation of Seed Industry of India — approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court, arguing that the state lacked the authority to impose such a ban. The court is expected to hear the matter on May 19, 2025.
According to officials, the banned varieties, particularly Pusa-44 and hybrids, consumed excessive amounts of water and had a longer maturity period, contributing to Punjab’s depleting groundwater levels. Jaswant Singh, director for Agriculture and Farmers Welfare in the state, said the decision was based on years of research conducted by Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) in Ludhiana. He added that hybrid seeds were not suitable for the state’s agro-ecological conditions.
“Hybrid varieties take longer to mature and require more water. Out of 150 administrative blocks in Punjab, groundwater was overexploited in 114. Only 17 blocks had relatively stable levels,” said Singh. He noted that the problem stemmed primarily from the state’s reliance on paddy cultivation.
Rajya Sabha MP and environmentalist Balbir Singh Seechewal also supported the move, stating that nearly 78 per cent of blocks in the state had entered the ‘dark zone’, with groundwater levels dropping precipitously. “This is a critical moment that demands firm and far-sighted action,” he said.
Concerns about disease resistance further motivated the ban. Singh recalled a bacterial blight outbreak in 1985, for which no chemical cure existed. A PAU committee had then advised that only blight-resistant paddy varieties be cultivated. “Hybrid paddy is more susceptible to blight and smut diseases, which can also affect neighbouring crops,” he added.
Punjab’s Agriculture Minister, Gurmeet Singh Khudian, argued that hybrid seeds were prohibitively expensive for small farmers. “Farmers often spend more than double on pesticides, fertilisers and other inputs when cultivating hybrid varieties. They may yield more rice, but the input costs are significantly higher,” he said.
Another concern was the environmental impact of crop residue from hybrid paddy. The plants tend to grow taller, leaving behind more biomass that is difficult to incorporate back into the soil. This, officials said, led to stubble burning — a major contributor to air pollution in north India.
Anuj Saini, president of Akriti, an environmental group working in Punjab and Haryana, claimed that traditional paddy varieties were more disease-resistant and less prone to bacterial infestations. State officials also contended that rice produced from hybrid paddy failed to meet the quality standards of the Food Corporation of India, causing losses to rice millers.
Paddy is cultivated over approximately 3.19 million hectares in Punjab. Until the ban, over half that area was reportedly under hybrid and Pusa-44 varieties. Critics of the seed industry alleged private seed companies sold substandard seeds at inflated prices. Farmers in several districts lodged complaints last year, citing financial losses.
However, the state’s decision drew strong opposition from parts of the farming community and seed industry representatives. Anuj Saini suggested that the hybrid seed lobby had vested interests in ensuring the state’s shift to traditional varieties did not succeed.
Ashok Chauhan, a farmer and vocal critic of hybrid seeds, argued that claims of higher yields were misleading. “Hybrid paddy requires five to six pesticide sprays and the longer stalks make harvesting difficult. When you factor in all the input costs, profits are negligible,” he said.
With the matter in court, uncertainty loomed large over farmers preparing for the sowing season. Sardul Singh Virk, who cultivates about 8 hectares in Patiala district, said nurseries needed to be prepared by early May if transplantation were to begin on June 1. “Unless the court rules quickly, farmers won’t know how to plan,” he said.
In Amritsar district, farmers Sukhpal Singh (60) and Arjun Das (70) acknowledged that hybrid seeds yielded more, but carried higher disease risks. “Even a small mistake can lead to massive losses,” said Singh.
The petitioners in the court have argued that the Punjab government does not have the legal authority to ban certified seeds. Advocate Harish Mehla pointed out that under the Seeds Act, 1966, only the central government could regulate seed quality. “All dealers are licensed under the Act and sell only those seeds certified by the Centre,” he said.
The Punjab government, in its defence, cited the East Punjab Improved Seeds and Plants Act, 1949, claiming it provided state-level powers to regulate seed sales. “We have acted within our jurisdiction,” the state asserted.
Meanwhile, the central government submitted to the High Court that the state’s ban contradicted federal law. It argued that under Section 5 of the Seeds Act, 1966, hybrid and Pusa-44 seeds had been certified and approved for use in Punjab.