Editor,

I wish to draw the attention of the Government of Arunachal Pradesh to the serious financial hardship being faced by small and marginal farmers who availed themselves of credit-linked assistance under the Atmanirbhar Krishi Yojana (ANKY) and Atmanirbhar Bagwani Yojana (ANBY).

These schemes were introduced with the laudable objective of strengthening the agricultural and horticultural economy of Arunachal, promoting self-employment and enabling farmers to establish sustainable sources of livelihood. However, several beneficiaries are now facing considerable financial distress after receiving recovery notices from banks demanding repayment of loans along with accumulated interest and other charges.

A major concern is the inadequate dissemination of information regarding the loan component of these schemes. Many small and marginal farmers reportedly understood the assistance primarily as government support or subsidy and did not fully appreciate that a portion of the assistance constituted a repayable bank-credit component. After being selected under the schemes, the beneficiaries were required to complete and sign various banking documents. However, in many cases, farmers with limited financial and banking literacy may not have fully understood the legal and financial implications of those documents, including the principal amount, interest liability, repayment schedule and consequences of default.

Banking documents are often lengthy and technically worded, and merely obtaining a signature cannot, by itself, ensure that a financially vulnerable farmer has understood the nature and consequences of the loan. There appears to have been a need for much stronger financial awareness, counselling and handholding by the implementing agencies and lending institutions.

The problem is compounded by the fact that some beneficiaries reportedly do not even possess copies of the original loan documents and are trying to understand their actual liabilities only after receiving recovery notices. This raises a legitimate question about whether adequate post-sanction counselling, documentation and repayment guidance were provided to beneficiaries.

The situation has become even more difficult because of poor monsoon conditions, crop losses, declining agricultural income and broader financial hardship. Farmers who took these loans with the expectation of generating income from agricultural or horticultural activities may now be struggling to meet even their basic household expenses. For a small farmer whose annual household income may itself be less than Rs 1 lakh, a relatively modest original loan can become a substantial burden when interest, penal interest and other charges accumulate over several years.

Another issue that deserves examination is the timing of recovery action. In some cases, beneficiaries have reportedly received recovery or show-cause notices only several years after the sanction and disbursement of the subsidised loan. The government and the financial institutions concerned should therefore examine whether beneficiaries were provided timely reminders, repayment schedules and opportunities for restructuring or regularisation before their liabilities accumulated substantially.

It is therefore requested that the Government of Arunachal Pradesh urgently consider a special one-time relief and settlement mechanism for genuinely distressed small and marginal beneficiaries of the ANKY and the ANBY. Particular consideration may be given to cases where the original bank-loan component was small, the beneficiary has suffered genuine agricultural or horticultural losses, and repayment has become impossible because of severe financial hardship.

The government may also consider taking up the matter with the banks concerned and exploring, where permissible under applicable banking regulations, a full or substantial waiver of accumulated interest, penal charges and other eligible components, or a favourable one-time settlement of the outstanding principal. For the most vulnerable cases, the government could examine whether a specially funded relief package can be formulated to settle eligible small agricultural loans.

Such intervention would not be unprecedented in spirit. Various state governments in India have, at different times, introduced agricultural debt-relief and loan-waiver measures for distressed farmers. Arunachal could similarly examine an appropriately designed and financially sustainable mechanism suited to its own circumstances.

At the same time, the government should undertake a district-wise review of the implementation of the ANKY and the ANBY. The review should examine whether beneficiaries were adequately informed about the credit-linked nature of the schemes, whether loan documents and repayment schedules were properly explained and supplied to them, whether financial counselling and handholding were provided, and whether banks and implementing agencies maintained adequate communication with beneficiaries after disbursement.

This is particularly important because government schemes intended for economically vulnerable farmers should not unintentionally place beneficiaries in a situation where they believe they have received primarily government assistance, only to discover years later that they face a significant repayable liability.

The issue is not merely about recovery of a bank loan. The ANKY and the ANBY were conceived as instruments of farmer empowerment, livelihood generation and economic self-reliance. If farmers who entered these schemes in good faith are now facing severe financial distress because of crop failure, inadequate income, lack of financial awareness and accumulated interest, a compassionate and policy-based intervention is both necessary and justified.

I therefore appeal to the chief minister, the agriculture and horticulture minister, the Agriculture and Horticulture Departments, and the financial institutions concerned to examine the grievances of the affected beneficiaries sympathetically and introduce a special relief and settlement mechanism for genuinely distressed farmers.

A one-time waiver or settlement of eligible small subsidised agricultural loans, particularly through relief from accumulated interest and penal charges, could provide immediate assistance to vulnerable farmers, restore their confidence in government credit-linked schemes and allow them to continue their agricultural livelihoods without the burden of unsustainable debt.

For a farmer struggling to earn even a modest annual income, debt accumulated from a small livelihood loan can become overwhelming. The objective of farmer-oriented government schemes should ultimately be to create sustainable livelihoods - not to leave already vulnerable farmers trapped in debt.

Anonymous