Farmer leaders have sharply reacted to the proposed amendments to the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966, introduced by the central government. Former Lok Sabha MP from Maharashtra and founder-president of the Swabhimani Shetkari Sanghatana, Raju Shetti, has submitted several objections and suggestions to the Centre regarding the proposed Sugarcane (Control) Order, 2026.
In a letter addressed to the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Shetti pointed out several shortcomings in the proposed order and demanded major changes to protect the interests of sugarcane farmers.
One of his key demands is the removal of the proposed provision mandating a 25-kilometer distance between new sugar mills. He argued that sugar manufacturing should be opened to all players and farmers should receive at least 75 percent share in the revenue generated from all sugar by-products.
In the letter sent to the ministry on May 18, 2026, Shetti said there should be greater clarity regarding the calculation and payment mechanism of the Fair and Remunerative Price (FRP) for sugarcane farmers. He questioned who would determine the cost of sugarcane production and on what basis the calculations would be made. According to him, the proposed Sugarcane (Control) Order, 2026 lacks clarity on several crucial issues.
The proposed order includes a provision to increase the minimum distance between new sugar mills to 25 kilometers. Opposing the move, Shetti said it would create monopolies for sugar mills and force farmers to sell their cane to a limited number of mills. He demanded that such provisions be removed from the new order.
According to Shetti, greater competition in the sugar sector would improve transparency and accountability in the industry. He also pointed out that while sugar mills often complain about shortage of sugarcane, many mills have simultaneously expanded their crushing capacities several times over, indicating sufficient scope for establishing new mills.
Shetti also raised concerns regarding harvesting and transportation (H&T) charges in Maharashtra. He argued that farmers located closer to sugar factories should not be burdened with additional transportation costs incurred by farmers located farther away. He demanded that the average harvesting and transportation cost mechanism should be formally included in the order.
The farmer leader further stated that sugar mills today generate substantial income not only from sugar but also from ethanol, power generation, biogas, fertilizers, molasses, bagasse, spirit, alcohol, and other bio-products. However, these additional revenue streams are not considered while fixing FRP for sugarcane farmers. Shetti demanded that farmers should receive at least 75 percent share in the revenue earned from all such by-products.
The issue of delayed payments to sugarcane farmers was also prominently raised in the letter. Shetti said that although the law provides for payment within 14 days, it does not clearly specify the maximum permissible delay period. He suggested that sugar mills failing to make payments within the stipulated timeframe should face criminal proceedings.
Shetti also highlighted the issue of loans taken by sugar mills from banks and financial institutions against pledged sugar stocks. He demanded that 80 percent of the loan amount raised against pledged sugar should be directly transferred to farmers’ bank accounts to ensure timely clearance of dues.
He further proposed that directors of sugar mills should be held jointly and individually responsible for unpaid farmer dues.
Calling for wider consultation, Shetti urged the Centre to hold open discussions with all stakeholders before implementing any amendments to the Sugarcane (Control) Order and ensure adequate protection of sugarcane farmers’ interests.