Punjab-based Basmati rice exporters have sought written assurance from Union Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal that the government will not alter the existing geographical indication (GI) area for Basmati rice, according to a letter sent on July 1, 2026, by the Punjab Rice Millers Exporters Association (PRMEA). The association warned that any expansion, particularly to include Madhya Pradesh, would harm India's exports and erode the heritage and traditional value of Basmati among international customers.
Exporters' Concerns and Demand for Consultation
In the letter addressed to Goyal, PRMEA director Ashok Sethi stated that any attempt to include Madhya Pradesh under the Basmati GI area "is totally unacceptable" and would harm India's exports. He cautioned that India would lose the "Heritage and Traditional Value" among its huge international customer base. The association demanded an immediate stakeholders' consultation to dispel the fears of farmers, noting that Punjab and Haryana Basmati farmers and rice millers would be directly affected by any change in the GI regime. The exporters' body also sought an assurance that the government "has no intention to tinker with GI Regulations or enhance its areas to include Madhya Pradesh or other states."
Opposition to Madhya Pradesh Inclusion
The PRMEA alleged that certain political leaders from Madhya Pradesh with vested interests have actively raked up the issue of including Madhya Pradesh under the Basmati GI area. The association argued that any expansion of the GI and Indo-Gangetic area, which today defines this region, would surely dilute its significance and erode the faith and trust of lakhs of Basmati-growing farmers across Punjab, Haryana, western Uttar Pradesh, parts of Uttarakhand, and the Jammu-Kathua belt. The current GI area specifically encompasses these traditional growing regions.
Industry Support for GI Integrity
Aman Gupta, Managing Director of Shiv Shakti Inter Globe Exports (SSIEL), said the ongoing discussion regarding the expansion of the Basmati GI region is a matter that warrants careful and balanced consideration. While supporting farmer welfare and creating broader opportunities across the agricultural value chain are important objectives, Gupta said that any proposed changes to the GI framework should be evaluated through a transparent process supported by scientific evidence, historical linkages, and internationally accepted GI principles. "As the industry moves forward, it is important that decisions related to the GI framework continue to safeguard the credibility, premium positioning, and global recognition that Indian Basmati has built over generations," Gupta added.
Broader Context: APEDA Law Firm Controversy and AIREA Resolution
Businessline on June 16 had reported that two rice exporters' organisations had urged the Commerce Ministry to reconsider the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA)'s decision to "arbitrarily" appoint a law firm to handle global cases on Basmati GI and intellectual property rights. However, APEDA sources said the law firm had been engaged after due process of tender by an expert selection panel. Separately, the All India Rice Exporters Association (AIREA), at its general body meeting held in Sonipat, Haryana, passed a resolution against extending Basmati GI status to new areas, directly challenging Madhya Pradesh's long-standing demand for inclusion. The resolution reflects growing resistance from the trade to Madhya Pradesh's claim, which has been opposed by traditional Basmati-producing states led by Haryana and Punjab.
The dispute underscores the tension between preserving the heritage of traditional Basmati-growing regions and accommodating demands for expansion. For importers and trade policy analysts, the outcome could affect supply chains, pricing, and the premium positioning of Indian Basmati in global markets. Any change to the GI area would require careful calibration to maintain the integrity of the GI label while addressing regional aspirations.
Sources:
