The Kerala High Court has formed a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe alleged irregularities in the procurement of 1.65 lakh liters of ghee for the Sabarimala temple. The investigation focuses on quality control issues, quantity discrepancies, and the bypassing of standard e-tender processes. While the supplier, Milma, has denied any wrongdoing, the case underscores broader governance risks in public procurement for state-managed institutions.
The Kerala High Court has directed the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), led by SP MJ Sojan, to conduct a comprehensive inquiry into the procurement and supply of ghee for the Sabarimala pilgrimage. The court’s decision follows persistent concerns regarding the management of 1.65 lakh liters of ghee supplied during the recent pilgrimage season, focusing on allegations that include supply chain lapses, potential adulteration, and significant discrepancies in the quantity delivered.
A central point of the court-ordered investigation involves the procurement process used by the Travancore Devaswom Board. Reports indicate that the contract for the ghee supply was awarded to the Kerala Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation, commonly known as Milma, without adhering to the standard e-tender process. This decision to bypass public bidding has drawn intense scrutiny, with the court looking into whether this deviation contributed to the alleged procedural lapses and the subsequent quality concerns.
The probe will also examine conflicting evidence regarding product quality. While the Travancore Devaswom Board previously stated that the stock was accepted following lab clearances, accusations of criminal negligence have surfaced. Specifically, investigations are looking into claims that only a small fraction of the received batches underwent quality testing, despite reports that multiple batches failed to meet established standards. The investigation aims to determine whether genuine ghee was diverted or replaced during transit, or if the quality issues originated at the supply source.
Milma, as a state-owned cooperative federation, has firmly denied these allegations. The management has maintained that it fulfilled the supply obligations in full, citing internal quality control protocols and laboratory certifications as evidence that its products met required standards. The cooperative has pledged its full cooperation with the SIT to clear its name and address the claims of malpractice.
For those interested in the broader economic and governance context, this case serves as a notable example of the risks associated with supply chain management in large-scale public institutions. When religious and state-run entities handle high-value procurement, the integrity of the process depends on transparent tendering, rigorous quality verification, and clear accountability at every stage of the logistics chain. As Milma is a state-owned cooperative and not a publicly traded entity, there is no direct impact on the stock market. However, the outcome of this investigation remains a key monitorable for observers of public governance and state-run cooperative management, as it could lead to stricter regulations and improved oversight in future public procurement contracts.