Was ghee meant for Sabarimala diverted? Ousted Milma governing council refutes charges

After over a month of silence, the governing council members of the dissolved Thiruvananthapuram Regional Milma Union on Monday alleged that the move against them was arbitrary and politically motivated. The governing council was dissolved on July 25, citing various irregularities, including the diversion of quality ghee meant for Sabarimala and its substitution with low-quality ghee.

The former governing council members said they were made scapegoats to prevent an LDF win in the coming elections to the Milma Federation. "If we were there, it was assumed that the LDF would win the southern region," said Mani Vishwanath, the chairperson of the dissolved governing council. "We knew of the dissolution only through the media. I was then informed over phone by the MD that the council has been disbanded. Kerala cooperative laws mandate that a notice be served before such a dissolution. Our side should also have been heard. But none of these happened," the former chairperson said.

She said that two of the issues cited in the order dissolving the governing council - procurement of milk from Maharashtra and the appointment of the MD for Thiruvananthapuram region - did not happen during her council's time.

The most damning charge related to the discrepancies in the sale of nearly 1.7 lakh litres of ghee to Sabarimala at ₹510 a litre. Milma ghee has a wholesale rate of ₹585 per litre and a special rate of ₹568 per litre. The former chairperson said that it was not an arbitrary decision taken by the governing council. "It was a decision taken with the concurrence of the Commercial Advisory Committee," Vishwanath said.

She said the contracted ghee was taken to Pampa from the Pathanamthitta Dairy of Milma. "All items taken from Pampa to Sannidhanam are subjected to scrutiny by the Food Safety Department. In fact, we had reached ghee to Pampa only after conducting quality tests at government labs in Pathanamthitta. We have also received the quality certificate from the Food Safety Department," she said, and added: "So the allegation that Milma had despatched inferior quality ghee is absolutely baseless."

Further, the members said that the ghee was sold last year. "Milma received the entire payment for the sale of ghee in January this year. If the ghee was of bad quality, why would the TDB pay us," said Krishnan Potti, a member of the dissolved governing council. "Interestingly, the complaints were raised after the new government came to power. Milma, however, had received no complaints whatsoever," he added.

Nonetheless, a preliminary enquiry report submitted by the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer of the Thiruvithamcore Devaswom Board (TDB) on August 2 had dug up serious irregularities that suggested a shady nexus between Milma officials and TDB authorities.

At the heart of the deal is a tender process that was put in motion by the TDB and was later abandoned to procure 'costly' ghee from Milma. In the tender process, two companies from Tamil Nadu and one from Kochi had quoted ₹369, ₹376 and ₹375 per litre.

Yet, Milma ghee was procured at a higher rate of ₹510 a litre. The samples of one Tamil Nadu company (Kumkumaraj Dairy) and the Kochi firm (Swami Ayyappa Enterprises) had even satisfied the quality standards. It was the then TDB executive officer, N Murari Babu, one of the accused in the Sabarimala gold smuggling scandal, who rooted for Milma ghee. He said Milma ghee was of superior quality and on top of it lesser quantities were required for the preparation of 'aravana'. Babu's aggressive push eventually caused the Board to purchase Milma ghee. (Murari Babu died on June 13 this year.)

However, the TDB Commissioner, in a communication dated April 3, 2025, strongly opposed the purchase of Milma ghee. He said Murari Babu's claim was unsupported by credible evidence.

The Chief Vigilance and Security Officer was also not sure whether the entire quantity of nearly 1.7 lakh litres of ghee had actually reached Sannidhanam.

Contrary to the claims of the ousted governing council members, the ghee supplied by Milma was never independently tested or analysed by the Food Safety and Standards Authority. During the enquiry, the Food Safety Officers informed the Vigilance Officer that samples had been collected only from five cans on October 10, 2025, one can on November 7, 2025, and one can on December 15, 2025. Thereafter, no samples whatsoever were collected by the Food Safety authorities.

This triggered the Vigilance Officer's damning question: 'Was any ghee received at Sannidhanam after December 15, 2025?' The records with the TDB have also been called into question. Usually, one batch number is assigned to every 5,000-litre tank of processed ghee, which would approximately comprise 333 cans. However, in this case, a single batch number has been assigned to nearly 1,000 cans, and this the Devaswom Vigilance Officer said was wholly inconsistent with the established manufacturing practice.

The report of the Vigilance Officer also raises the serious apprehension that money could have been released even for ghee supplies that did not reach Sannidhanam. This has led to doubts that Milma, in collusion with certain TDB officers, could have diverted the ghee to be sold elsewhere for a higher margin and then replenished the shortfall with low-quality ghee from other sources.