SAHIWAL, Sept 2: The second series of ejectment notices have been served by the maize farm managements to tenants of maize farm Chak 86/9-L.
Subsequently, the Grain Market police registered a case against 39 defaulters (tenants) for not sharing the produce of the land with the farm management.
Earlier, Kassowal police registered on Aug 25 a case against 68 tenants of Chak 114/12-L, Iqbalnagar, under 144 CrPc for default of Rs2.96 million.
According to details, the government had established three maize seed farms in 1958 known as Hybrid Maize Seed Farm, Yusafwala; Hybrid Maize Seed Farm, Chak 86/9-L, Sahiwal; and Hybrid Maize Seed Farm, Chak 114/12-L, Iqbalnagar.
The sole objective of these farms was the production of hybrid maize seed.
In 1968, the government upgraded the status of these farms to “Maize & Millet Research Institute (MMRI)” with offices at Yusafwala. The three farms were given under the control of the institute.
The MMRI was assigned the task to develop maize, sorghum and pearl millet varieties and their seed multiplication for commercial cultivation.
Sorghum and pearl millet crops could not do well here because of climatic conditions. Therefore, the farms under the control of the MMRI are mainly being used for maize seed production.
The total land holding (of these farms) is 2,928 acres while the area under tenancy/patadari is 2,690 acres.
In 1958/60, the crop produce share of the government was 40 per cent while the tenants/patadars got 60 per cent. In 1975, it was revised to 50/50 per cent in accordance with the 1960 & 1972 agriculture reforms, but it was never implemented.
In 1994, it was again revised to 40/60 per cent share as decided by the high court.
According to farm managements, only seven squares of cultivated land is sufficient to carry out the successful research work on maize, sorghum and pearl millet crops.
The management recommended the change of system from sharing to annual rent or privatization. According to the farm management, the per acre annual rent ranges from Rs6,000 to Rs6,500 in the areas of farms. This may bring more revenue to the government when the sharing system of crops has failed, they claim.
Tenants/patadars have rejected the farm management claims of sharing the fertilizer/pesticides cost. They say they have to purchase these inputs when the government does not share them.
They say they are justified in demanding proprietary rights for the agricultural land after such a long service to the government. “The farm managements have cleverly changed their status of tenancy to the patadari system.”
According to them, tenants/patadars are law-abiding people, but they have continuously been harassed on petty matters by the management.