top of page

By:

Rajendra Joshi

3 December 2024 at 9:20:26 am

Sugar industry strains as traders reap profits

Gap between ex-mill prices, retail rates raised questions Kolhapur: The Indian sugar industry is caught in a deepening crisis, with sugar mills struggling to secure remunerative prices for their produce even as traders and middlemen appear to be making substantial profits. While sugar mills are receiving between Rs 4,600 and Rs 4,800 per quintal through recent sale tenders, retail prices have remained as high as Rs 58 per kg. The widening gap between ex-mill prices and retail rates has...

Sugar industry strains as traders reap profits

Gap between ex-mill prices, retail rates raised questions Kolhapur: The Indian sugar industry is caught in a deepening crisis, with sugar mills struggling to secure remunerative prices for their produce even as traders and middlemen appear to be making substantial profits. While sugar mills are receiving between Rs 4,600 and Rs 4,800 per quintal through recent sale tenders, retail prices have remained as high as Rs 58 per kg. The widening gap between ex-mill prices and retail rates has raised serious questions about the role of intermediaries and the effectiveness of the Centre’s efforts to contain sugar prices. The margins available to traders and intermediaries have reportedly crossed 20 per cent, leaving sugar millers perplexed. At a time when both sugarcane growers and mill operators are under financial pressure, the trading chain appears to be benefiting disproportionately. The Centre must examine this growing disparity and take corrective measures to prevent speculative profiteering. Retail sugar prices began rising sharply in August, touching nearly Rs 70 per kg in some markets. The escalation added to inflationary pressures and caused concern among consumers, particularly ahead of the festive season. In response, the Centre introduced a series of measures to improve domestic availability and moderate prices. These included permitting duty-free sugar imports, initially until October 31, a deadline subsequently extended to December 31. The government also directed sugar mills to commence the crushing season from October 15 and tightened monitoring of sugar stocks. In another significant intervention, it modified the ethanol policy, restricting the diversion of sugarcane juice, sugar syrup and B-heavy molasses for ethanol production. Following these measures, sugar mills began witnessing a decline in the prices offered through their sale tenders. Recent transactions have fetched between Rs 4,600 and Rs 4,800 per quintal. Going by the conventional relationship between ex-mill prices and retail rates, sugar should ideally have been available to consumers at less than ₹50 per kg. However, retail prices continue to hover around Rs 58 per kg, pointing to a substantial disconnect between the mill gate and the consumer market. Traditionally, sugar retailing operated on relatively thin margins. Since sugar is an essential commodity, retailers often treated it as a low-margin product to attract customers who would subsequently purchase other household provisions. The margin was sometimes informally equated with the resale value of the empty 50-kg jute bags in which sugar was supplied. This was considered a nominal return for retailers. That traditional pricing mechanism, however, appears to have undergone a significant change. The widening gap between mill-level tender prices and retail rates has created considerable scope for intermediaries to extract higher margins. The critical question is whether the additional amount paid by consumers is reaching the sugar mills or remaining within the trading chain. The issue assumes particular significance in Maharashtra, where the sugarcane pricing dispute has intensified ahead of the new crushing season. Farmers’ organisations have been demanding a minimum price of Rs 5,500 per tonne for sugarcane. Millers, meanwhile, are preparing to agitate for a revision in the Fair and Remunerative Price (FRP) framework and the restoration of a more supportive ethanol policy. The Swabhimani Shetkari Sanghatana, led by Raju Shetti, has taken a firm position that sugar mills should not be allowed to commence operations until farmers receive an acceptable price for their cane. Shetti has also drawn the state government’s attention to the unusually high retail prices of sugar, questioning why consumers continue to pay more even as mills are forced to sell at relatively lower rates. The Centre’s sudden changes to the ethanol policy have further complicated the industry’s financial position. Ethanol production had emerged as an important revenue stream for sugar mills, enabling them to diversify operations, improve cash flows and enhance their capacity to pay farmers. Restrictions on the diversion of sugarcane-based raw materials have weakened this support at a critical juncture. The resulting contradiction is difficult to ignore: farmers are demanding better cane prices, millers are struggling with shrinking realisations and policy uncertainty, while intermediaries appear to be benefiting from the gap between wholesale and retail prices. The government cannot address the sugar crisis merely by regulating mill stocks, imports and ethanol diversion. It must also examine the entire supply chain, identify where the widening margins are accruing and ensure that the benefits of market interventions reach both sugarcane growers and consumers. With nearly Rs 2 lakh crore riding on the sugar economy, allowing intermediaries to thrive while the industry’s primary stakeholders struggle would be a serious policy failure.

RSS and the Communists: A Parallel Journey of Two Opposing Ideologies

Oct 12, 2025
5 min read

Part 1: Exactly a century ago, the RSS and the Communist Party of India were founded within months of each other. The first of a three-part series examines how the two entities charted opposing courses in shaping the nation’s political mind.

RSS founder K.B. Hedgewar with other Sangh leaders in 1939.
RSS founder K.B. Hedgewar with other Sangh leaders in 1939.

 This year marks one hundred years since the founding of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Coincidentally, it is also around this time that the Communist Party of India completes its own century of existence. These two ideological streams represent the extreme poles of India’s social and political life. Their philosophical foundations, methods of functioning, loyalties, and ultimate goals stand in stark opposition to each other. That such diametrically opposed ideologies should have arisen at almost the same moment in history is a striking coincidence.

 

As both the RSS and the Communists mark their centenaries together, a comparative examination of their journeys becomes necessary. Such a study can illuminate the progress — or decline — of India’s political thought and organization over the past century. What follows is my own preliminary and broad attempt at such a comparison.


Let us begin with their founding.

 

Early days

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh was established in 1925, on the day of Vijayadashami (Dussehra, 27 September), in Nagpur. The initiative was led by the late Dr. K. B. Hedgewar, with the participation of several prominent Hindutva-minded individuals from Nagpur and the wider Vidarbha region. Some among them held senior positions in the Congress. Notably, however, not a single Englishman or foreigner was present at the founding.


Before creating the RSS, Dr. Hedgewar had been actively engaged in the freedom struggle through the Congress. A staunch follower of Lokmanya Tilak, he served as the General Secretary of the Vidarbha Congress. After Tilak’s death, however, he found himself unable to accept the political line adopted by the Congress. He withdrew from the party and went on to found the RSS. This sequence of events is historically well-attested and documented; there has never been any dispute over it.


At its very inception, it was made clear that the organization would remain completely apart from politics and political activity, working solely for social and national rejuvenation. Its declared aims were to unite Hindu society, revive India’s national character on the strength of that unity, and strive for the creation of a united, prosperous, and powerful India.


There are sharp disagreements regarding the exact details of the founding of the Communist Party of India. Different dates and events between 1920 and 1925 are cited in this context. On 17 October 1920, the Communist Party of India was established in Tashkent, Russia, at the initiative of M. N. Roy. Present on the occasion were Roy’s English wife Evelyn Trent Roy, Avani Mukherjee, Roza Fitingof, Mohammad Ali, Mohammad Shafiq, and several others — including a few prominent British communists. However, the Communist Party of India (CPI) does not recognize this event as its official founding. They consider 26 December 1925 as their foundation day, because on that date the first Communist Party conference was held in Kanpur. At that conference too, M. N. Roy, his wife Evelyn Trent Roy, and several British and Russian delegates were present.

M.N Roy (centre) with Lenin (front) and Maxim Gorky (behind Lenin) in Moscow, 1920.
M.N Roy (centre) with Lenin (front) and Maxim Gorky (behind Lenin) in Moscow, 1920.

Yet, a large section of communists in India does not consider the Kanpur conference to mark the party’s true birth. Their reasoning is that between 1920 and 1923, a number of small and large communist groups had already been formed in different parts of India. Around the same time, trade unions claiming to work on Marxist principles had also been established in several places. These organizations were primarily concentrated in the provinces of Bombay, Madras, United Provinces, Punjab, Sindh, Orissa, and Bengal. All such groups eventually came together at the Kanpur conference. The CPI(M) maintains that because these groups united there to formally establish the Communist Party of India, 26 December 1925 should be considered the official foundation day. Meanwhile, supporters of other factions continue to regard the founding dates of their own groups as the true birth of the Communist Party in India.

 

In short, there is considerable disagreement among communists themselves about when exactly the party was founded. But 26 December 1925 is the final date in this debate; if that date is taken into account, the Communist Party was founded just two months after the RSS. Accordingly, its centenary also begins this very year.

 

Class struggle

From the day of its inception, the Communist Party of India was part of the global communist movement. Its declared aim was to foment class struggle in India, wrest political power and wealth from the capitalists and landlords, and establish a dictatorship of the proletariat. They had no acceptance of any form of democracy. Alongside this, they held another distinct belief: that “India is not one country, not one nation, but a collection of sixteen to eighteen nations.” Indian communists claimed that this conclusion was based on the country’s linguistic and caste diversity — though in reality, this argument had long been advanced by certain English thinkers, and the Indian communists merely presented it as their own.

 

According to them, communities speaking Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, Malayalam, Marathi, Bengali, Odia, Gujarati, Sindhi, Punjabi, and Kashmiri, as well as religious communities like Sikhs, Buddhists, Muslims, and Christians, were all separate nations. But there was no mention of the Hindus in this enumeration. Just as they argued that “India is not one country,” they also declared — based on what they called “deep study” — that “there is no such religion as Hinduism.” They believed that all these various “nations” should come together voluntarily to form a “Union of India.” But before that could happen, they considered it their foremost duty to “liberate” each of these nations from what they called India’s slavery.

 

In simple terms, their declared objective — then and now — was to break India into sixteen to eighteen separate parts.

 

The RSS, by contrast, was founded with the purpose of creating a united, integral, strong, and prosperous India. Not a single foreign power or individual participated in the RSS’s founding. In the case of the Communist Party, however, British and Russian individuals and institutions played a major role. The RSS functioned on the basis of the meagre contributions it received from its sympathizers, while from its very inception, the Communist Party received generous funding from Russia and England. In addition, the British government itself regularly provided money to the communists.

 

As we shall see, the dependence ran deeper than money. The CPI’s political line often shifted with the twists of Soviet foreign policy — opposing the Indian National Congress in one decade, aligning with it in another, condemning the Second World War as imperialist before abruptly supporting it after Hitler’s invasion of the USSR. This opportunism betrayed the party’s subservience to Moscow rather than loyalty to Indian realities.

 

While the RSS sought to build a movement rooted in India’s civilizational identity, the Communists were entangled in ideological and financial strings that ran through London and Moscow — a foreign tether that would shadow their politics for decades.

 

[Tomorrow, we examine the relations of the RSS and the Communists with the British government and the Congress, following Independence.]  


(The writer is Vice-President, BJP Maharashtra, former Chief State Spokeperson of the BJP, Maharashtra and Director, Vilasrao Salunke Adhysan (Rambhau Mhalgi Prabodhini). He is also the author of several books including a noted work on Ayodhya.) 

 


 
 
 

Comments


bottom of page