As Andhra grapples with crop failures, urea shortages, and suicides, the question lingers: Are tenant farmers mere serfs sustaining landowners?
Published Oct 26, 2025 | 2:46 PM ⚊ Updated Oct 26, 2025 | 2:46 PM
Andhra's tenant farmers.
Synopsis: In Andhra Pradesh, tenant farmers who till the land with their sweat but reap only debt and despair. Governments, past and present, have turned a blind eye to tenant farmers, come a drought, a pest infestation, or a market slump, the farmer plunges into irreversible loss.
In the fertile deltas of Andhra Pradesh, where the Godavari and Krishna rivers nourish the soil that feeds millions, a quiet crisis unfolds. It is the story of tenant farmers (kaulu raitulu in Telugu) who till the land with their sweat but reap only debt and despair.
Take, for instance, the tale of a modest farmer from I Polavaram village in the Konaseema district, whose daily grind mirrors the plight of countless others across the state. For two acres leased on tenancy, he harvests 140 bags of paddy across two seasons — 60 in the first, 80 in the second, each bag weighing 75 kg.
After handing over 48 bags (24 per acre) to the landowner as rent, he sells the remaining 92 at ₹1,600 each, grossing ₹1,47,200. But subtract the ₹1,40,000 investment (₹60,000 for the first crop, ₹80,000 for the second) and ₹20,000 in interest on borrowed capital, and what’s left is a paltry ₹3,000 for the year— or a mere ₹8 per day.
Merely enough to buy a cup of tea, perhaps, but hardly sufficient to sustain a family. And this, mind you, assumes ideal conditions: Fertile soil, quality seeds, ample water, no pests, minimal labour, and access to minimum support prices. Any deviation — a drought, a pest infestation, or a market slump — and the farmer plunges into irreversible loss.
This anecdote, drawn from ground-level interactions, is not an outlier but an emblematic snapshot of the systemic neglect revealed in a recent field survey by the Andhra Pradesh Tenant Farmers Association (APTFA) in partnership with People’s Pulse Research Institute.
Conducted from 20 September to 20 October 2025, across all 26 districts, the study gathered nearly 3,000 samples — 100 to 125 per district — analysing data collected by APTFA members and processed by People’s Pulse.
What emerges is a damning indictment: Governments, past and present, have turned a blind eye to tenant farmers. In the undivided Andhra Pradesh and its residual form post-2014 bifurcation, no administration has truly addressed their woes, as felt by an overwhelming majority of respondents.
At the heart of this disillusionment is the staggering indifference of political parties. A whopping 92.1 percent of tenant farmers believe no party cares about their problems, with only 6.1 percent seeing any engagement and 1.9 percent unsure.
This apathy is especially raw under the current TDP-Jana Sena-BJP coalition government, now 17 months into its term.
Farmers seethe over unkept promises from the 2024 elections, chief among them the issuance of identification cards—kaulu cards—that would unlock welfare schemes, crop insurance, and financial aid. Only 12.3% have received these cards; 87.7% have not. The existing Crop Cultivator Rights Act (CCRC), meant to protect cultivators, has instead become a hurdle, and the coalition’s vow to replace it with a new law remains hollow rhetoric.
Recall the “Prajagalam” manifesto: Grand assurances of delivering cards without landowner involvement, extending all social security benefits, and applying crop insurance. Yet, despite announcements of enacting a tenant-friendly law within the year, nothing has materialised.
Farmers, in hushed conversations during the survey, accused the government of a blatant U-turn. “If there’s genuine intent,” many said, “bring it via ordinance, even without assembly sessions — or convene a special one.”
The coalition did hold five statewide conferences, soliciting views from tenant farmers, unions, and NGOs. But as respondents wryly noted, was that input tossed into the trash, or will it ever see the light of day? No clarity, only cynicism.
This betrayal exacerbates an already precarious existence. Tenant farmers, 70 percent of whom hail from marginalised Backward Class (BC), Scheduled Caste (SC), and Scheduled Tribe (ST) communities, face a barrage of challenges.
Annual investments for farming average high: 34.3 percent need over ₹60,000, 23.8 percent between ₹40,000 and ₹60,000, 34.8 percent between ₹25,000 and ₹45,000, and 7.2 percent between ₹10,000 and ₹25,000.
Per acre, costs mirror this: 26.5 percent invest over ₹60,000, 21.5 percent between ₹40,000 and ₹60,000, 33.8 percent between ₹20,000 and ₹40,000, and 13.3 percent between ₹10,000 and ₹20,000. Yet, returns are dismal — one crop season yields over ₹25,000 for just 28.1 percent, breaks even for 19.4 percent, and results in losses for 15.4 percent. Labour alone devours 69.8 percent of expenses.
Financing is a minefield. Farmers rely on moneylenders (38.1 percent), rice millers, brokers, and traders (28.8 percent), cooperative banks (13.5 percent), landowners (12.7 percent), and national banks (a meagre 2.5 percent).
Private loans come at usurious rates: 79 percent pay two percent monthly (₹2 per ₹100), 6.7 percent at 1.5 percent, 1.8 percent at one percent, and 8.2 percent at three percent. Debts soar — 20.4 percent owe over ₹5 lakh, 14.5 percent between ₹3 lakh and ₹5 lakh, 34.6 percent between ₹1.5 lakh and ₹3 lakh, 21.5 percent between ₹50,000 and ₹1.5 lakh, and nine percent under ₹50,000.
The primary afflictions? Escalating prices of seeds, fertilisers, pesticides, labour, and machinery rents (67.2%), high tenancy fees (12.5%), absent remunerative prices (10.8%), debt spirals from interest (5.5%), and marketing hurdles (4%). Fertiliser issues persist, with landowners refusing to cut rent during crop failures.
Government aid for untimely rains, droughts, floods, or cyclones — often meagre — rarely reaches tenants. Without ID cards, banks deny crop loans, forcing high-interest borrowings and swelling debt burdens.
Registration lapses mean no input subsidies post-disasters, no sales at government procurement centres (pushing low-price deals with brokers), and no crop insurance, as tenants lack ownership papers.
Even schemes like Rythu Bharosa, designed for tenants, falter due to missing documents and awareness gaps. Yields dip from rain shortages and pests, with zero governmental succour.
Agreements are verbal (92.3%), written (3.9%), or revenue-recorded (2.6%), leaving tenants exposed in disputes, risking loss of land and invested crops. Training in modern methods or climate adaptation is nonexistent, further eroding productivity.
Social layers add insult. Tenants provide free services to landowners during events, face caste-based interest and tenancy disparities, and endure landowners’ paranoia that repeated leasing might grant them land rights.
Landowners preemptively take crop loans on tenanted plots; if in arrears, tenants get nothing. Many tenants farm long-term — 35.5 percent over 20 years, 17.4 percent for 11-20, 20 percent for 6-10, 27 percent for 1-5 — on modest holdings: over 10 acres (15.9 percent), 4-10 (34.8 percent), 1-3 (43.6 percent), under 1 (5.7 percent).
Tenancy payments vary: Cash over ₹35,000 (5.1%), ₹25,000-35,000 (8.7%), ₹10,000-25,000 (27.3%), under ₹10,000 (22.4%); in grain, 20-30 bags per acre (13.2%), 15-20 (8.7%), 10-15 (14.5%).
The irony? Landowners thrive without toil. For two acres, they pocket ₹20,000 in subsidies (central and state, in instalments), zero-interest loans up to ₹1 lakh (₹80,000 via scale of finance), lent out at two percent monthly rates for ₹20,000 profit, plus over ₹78,000 in tenancy. Total: ₹1,18,000 annually.
No land taxes; purchases dodge income tax. Procurement perks — weighing, labour, transport charges — stay with owners. Subsidised machinery is rented back to tenants. Bonuses and incentives flow to them.
Absentee owners (in cities, states, or abroad) use tenants as guardians. Tenants enhance land value by clearing debris, boosting resale. They perform unpaid social duties. Disaster subsidies and insurance? To owners, leaving tenants destitute.
Exploitation is multifaceted: Tenancy gouging, usurious interest, market cheats, rising inputs (seeds, fertilisers, pesticides), and natural calamities. Tenants endure mental anguish — worrying over yields, prices, recoveries — leading to illnesses, disorders, and suicides. Loan waivers aid bank-borrowing owners, not tenants.
Ex-gratia for suicides? Denied without ID cards, as owners withhold consent. Only 25 percent of the landowners farm themselves; some mix owned and tenanted land, but many landless poor depend solely on tenancy. Farmers demand: Sanction loans per scale of finance for ID holders, ignoring owner debts; enact tenancy protection via ordinance or special session.
As Andhra grapples with 2025’s crop failures, urea shortages (40 percent deficit, hiking costs by ₹300 crore), and suicides in places like Palnadu, the question lingers: Are tenant farmers mere serfs sustaining landowners?
Governments must heed this cry — revise loan SOPs, ensure e-crop registration, and fulfil promises. For in neglecting these tillers, we undermine the very roots of our agrarian society. The fields whisper their stories; it’s time we listened.
(Edited by Muhammed Fazil.)
