16 - Agriculture - 29 Fertiliser

TWENTY-NINTH REPORT
STANDING COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

(2015-2016)
(SIXTEENTH LOK SABHA)
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE

(DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL, RESEARCH AND EDUCATION)
IMPACT OF CHEMICAL FERTILIZERS AND PESTICIDES ON

AGRICULTURE AND ALLIED SECTORS IN THE COUNTRY
Presented to Lok Sabha on 11.08.2016

Laid on the Table of Rajya Sabha on 11.08.2016
LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT

NEW DELHI
August, 2016/Shravana, 1938 (Saka)
COA No. 345
Price : R 211.00
© 2016 BY LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT

Published under Rule 382 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct
of Business in Lok Sabha (Fifteenth Edition) and printed by
Jainco Art India, New Delhi-110 005.
CONTENTS
PAGE
COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE (2014-2015) ............................. (v)

COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE (2015-2016) ............................. (vii)
INTRODUCTION ................................................................. (ix)
REPORT
PART I
CHAPTER I Introduction ................................................ 1
Green Revolution Impact on Agricultural Growth in
India .......................................................... 2
Decadal Growth Rate of Net Sown Area in the
Country ...................................................... 4
Availability of Agricultural Land in the Country .... 6
Long Term Impact of the Strategies adopted for
enhancing productivity during the Green
Revolution in the Country ............................... 9
CHAPTER II Improper Fertilizer Use and Decline in Crop
Productivity ................................................. 12
Fertilizer Use and Environmental Concerns ......... 13
(i) Human and Animal Health disorders .............. 13
(ii) Pollution of Water Resources ...................... 14
(iii) Greenhouse Gas Emission .......................... 15
CHAPTER III Pattern of Fertilizers Use, Fertilizer Subsidy and
Integrated Nutrient Management ...................... 19
Requirement, Availability and Import of Fertilizer ... 19
Pattern of Fertilizer Consumption ..................... 20
Per Hectare use of Chemical Fertilizers ............. 21
State-wise Ratio of Consumption of Chemical Fertilizers
(NPK) ......................................................... 23
Crop-wise Use of Fertilizers ............................ 25
Integrated Nutrient Management ...................... 28
(i)
PAGE
Soil Health Card Scheme ................................ 31

Soil Testing Labs in the Country ....................... 33
Organic Farming ........................................... 36
Incentives to Encourage Organic Farming ........... 38
Certification of Organic Farming Produce ........... 39
Use of Bio-fertilizers ..................................... 39
Policy for Promotion of Use of Bio-Fertilizers ...... 41
Subsidy Policy on Fertilizers ............................ 42
Subsidy on Urea ........................................... 42
Fertilizer Management Strategies and Nutrient Based
Subsidy for P&K Fertilizers .............................. 44
Certification for Fertilizers ............................. 47
CHAPTER IV Use of Pesticides in Agriculture Sector in India and
Its Impact ................................................... 50
Benefits of Use of Pesticides ........................... 51
Requirement/demand of Pesticides in India ......... 51
Import of Pesticides ...................................... 55
Impacts of Pesticides on Agriculture and Allied
sector in the Country and on human health ........ 57
Pesticides Residue in Food Products .................. 59
Study/Research on Impact of Pesticides on Human
Health ....................................................... 63
Presence of Pesticides in Human Blood Samples ... 64
Effects of Improper Use of Chemical Fertilizers,
Pesticides and other Potential Pollutants on
Occupational Groups ...................................... 65
Use of DDT in Agriculture ............................... 67
Insecticides Act, 1968 .................................... 67
Role of ICMR in Central Insecticides Board ......... 72
Integrated Pest Management ........................... 73
Allocations for Integrated Pest Management ........ 76
Training Programmes on Integrated Pest
Management ................................................ 77
Use of Protective Gears by the Farmers during
Sprinkling of Pesticides in Fields ...................... 80
(ii)
PAGE
PART II
Observations/Recommendations of the Committee ....... 81
ANNEXURES
I. AICRP on Long Term Fertilizer Experiments (LTFE) ....... 95
II. State-wise Number of Soil Testing Laboratories in the
Country, their Analyzing Capacity and Utilization during
2012-13 ............................................................. 98
III. Workshops and Training programmes organized by ICAR
Institutes on Integrated Nutrient Management in the
Country ............................................................. 100
IV. IPNS Packages for Dominant Cropping System in Different
Agro-Climatic Region of the Country ......................... 103
V. Notification dated 01st August, 2011, Ministry of Health
and Family Welfare .............................................. 109
VI. NIOH Studies ....................................................... 133
VII. Insecticides Refused for Registration by the Registration
Committee ......................................................... 139
VIII. Insecticides/Insecticides Formulations Banned in India ..... 140
IX. Insecticides Restricted for Use in the Country ............ 142
X. List of Pesticides/Formulations which are Banned ........ 144
APPENDICES
I. Minutes of the 10th Sitting of the Committee held on
10.12.2014 ......................................................... 146
II. Minutes of the 11th Sitting of the Committee held on
16.12.2014 ......................................................... 149
III. Minutes of the 13th Sitting of the Committee held on
05.01.2015 ......................................................... 152
IV. Minutes of the 33rd Sitting of the Committee held on
26.08.2015 ......................................................... 154
V. Minutes of the 29th Sitting of the Committee held on
08.08.2016 ......................................................... 157
(iii)
COMPOSITION OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
(2014-2015)
Shri Hukm Deo Narayan Yadav — Chairperson
MEMBERS
Lok Sabha
2. Shri Sanganna Amarappa

3. Prof. Ravindra Vishwanath Gaikwad
*4. Prof. Richard Hay
5. Shri Nalin Kumar Kateel
6. Md. Badaruddoza Khan
7. Shri C. Mahendran
8. Dr. Tapas Mandal
9. Shri Janardan Mishra
10. Shri Ajay Nishad
11. Shri Dalpat Singh Paraste
12. Shri Nityanand Rai
13. Shri Mukesh Rajput
14. Shri Konakalla Narayana Rao
15. Shri C.L. Ruala
16. Shri Arjun Charan Sethi
17. Shri Satyapal Singh
18. Shri Virendra Singh
19. Shri Jai Prakash Narayan Yadav
20. Shri Dharmendra Yadav
21. Shri B.S. Yeddyurappa
*Nominated as a Member of Committee on Agriculture vide Lok Sabha Bulletin Part-II

No. 2303 dated 17.08.2015 vice Shri Kadiyam Srihari who ceased to be the Member
of the Committee on his resignation from Lok Sabha w.e.f. 11.06.2015 vide Notification
No. 21/1/2015/T(B) dated 15.06.2015
(v)
Rajya Sabha
22. Shri A.W. Rabi Bernard

23. Shrimati Renuka Chowdhury
24. Sardar Sukhdev Singh Dhindsa
25. Shri Janardan Dwivedi
26. Shri Vinay Katiyar
27. Shri Mohd. Ali Khan
28. Shri Rajpal Singh Saini
29. Shri Ram Nath Thakur
30. Shri Shankarbhai N. Vegad
31. Shri Darshan Singh Yadav
(vi)
COMPOSITION OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
(2015-2016)

MEMBERS
Lok Sabha

3. Shri Sanganna Karadi
*5. Smt. Raksha Nikhil Khadse
8. Dr. Tapas Mandal
10. Shri Ajay Nishad
$11. Vacant
15. Shri C.L. Ruala
17. Shri Satyapal Singh (Sambhal)
Rajya Sabha
^22. Vacant
* Smt. Raksha Nikhil Khadse, MP, Lok Sabha, nominated to the Committee w.e.f.
13.04.2016 vice Prof. Richard Hay who ceased to be the Member of the Committee
w.e.f. 13.04.2016.
$ Vacant due to sad demise of Shri Dalpat Singh Paraste w.e.f. 01.06.2016.
^ Vacant due to retirement of Shri A.W. Rabi Bernard from the Membership of
Rajya Sabha w.e.f. 29.06.2016 vide CB-I Note dated 28.06.2016.
(vii)
#24. Sardar Sukhdev Singh Dhindsa
@26. Shri Meghraj Jain
SECRETARIAT
1. Shri U.B.S. Negi — Joint Secretary

2. Shri Arun K. Kaushik — Director
3. Smt. Juby Amar — Additional Director
4. Shri Sumesh Kumar — Under Secretary
# Sardar Sukhdev Singh Dhindsa, MP Rajya Sabha, nominated to the Committee w.e.f.
23.05.2016 vide Lok Sabha Bulletin—Part II, No. 3581 dated 23.05.2016.
@ Shri Meghraj Jain, MP Rajya Sabha, nominated to the Committee w.e.f. 28.07.2016
vide Rajya Sabha Bulletin—Part II, dated 28.07.2016.
Shri Rajpal Singh Saini from the Membership of Rajya Sabha w.e.f. 04.07.2016 vide
CB-I Note dated 28.06.2016.
(viii)
INTRODUCTION
I, the Chairperson, Standing Committee on Agriculture (2015-2016)

having been authorized by the Committee to submit the Report on
their behalf, present this Twenty-Ninth Report (Sixteenth Lok Sabha)
on the subject ‘Impact of Chemical Fertilizers and Pesticides on
Agriculture and Allied Sectors in the Country’ pertaining to the Ministry
of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare (Department of Agricultural Research
and Education).
2. The Standing Committee on Agriculture (2014-15) had selected
this subject for examination and report. The Committee took evidence
of the representatives of Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare
(Department of Agricultural Research and Education and Department
of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare), Ministry of Chemicals
and Petrochemicals (Department of Fertilizers and Department of
Chemicals and Petrochemicals) and Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
(Department of Health Research) on the subject at their Sitting held
on 10.12.2014, 16.12.2014, 05.01.2015 and 26.08.2015 respectively.
The Standing Committee on Agriculture (2015-16) has again selected
the subject for examination.
3. The Report was considered and adopted by the Committee at
their Sitting held on 08.08.2016.
4. For facility of reference, the observations/recommendations of
the Committee have been printed in bold at Part-II of the Report.
5. The Committee wish to express their thanks to the representatives
of Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare (Department of
Agricultural Research and Education and Department of Agriculture,
Cooperation & Farmers Welfare), Ministry of Chemicals and
Petrochemicals (Department of Fertilizers and Department of Chemicals
and Petrochemicals) and Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
(Department of Health Research) for furnishing requisite information
to the Committee in connection with examination of the subject.
6. The Committee would also like to place on record their
appreciation for the invaluable assistance rendered to them by the
officials of the Lok Sabha Secretariat attached to the Committee.
NEW DELHI; HUKM DEO NARAYAN YADAV,

08 August, 2016 Chairperson,
17 Shravana, 1938 (Saka) Standing Committee on Agriculture.
(ix)
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Ever since invention, agriculture has been the mainstay of

human civilization. Domestication of wild plants after onset of
agriculture, led to surplus production of foodgrains which in turn
supported more number of people in society. Innovation of new ways
for food production in agriculture was revolutionary, as it allowed less
number of people to be engaged for food production. In this way,
society could deploy more persons to other activities which led to
progress in the field of art, craft, science etc. Therefore, it has always
been endeavour of every society of world to devise better varieties,
process and ways to improve production, productivity and quality of
agricultural produce so that pace of growth in agriculture may be kept
ahead of population growth. Use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides
was also seen as a revolution in the field of agriculture by which we
were able to enhance agricultural productivity and food grains
production across the world to the level do satisfying need of ever
increasing population.
1.2 Our country is bestowed with diverse Agro-climatic resources

which have massive potential for rich harvest of agricultural produce.
However, at the time of independence, we were facing acute shortage
of cereals and other agricultural products due to legacy of bad
agricultural policies of British Government. In the backdrop of the
food crisis that gripped India in the 1960s, the Government of India
initiated the ‘Green Revolution’ program. This was an attempt to
become self-sufficient in production of foodgrains. Traditional farming
methods gave way to farming with high-yield seeds, fertilizers and
pesticides. The Green Revolution nearly quadrupled the production of
rice and wheat, transforming India’s fertile areas into ‘granaries’. India
has achieved a remarkable growth in agriculture, increasing foodgrain
production from 83 mt in 1960-61 to about 252.7 mt (fourth estimate)
in 2014-15. Now, our country is not only self sufficient in production
of foodgrain to meet food requirement of the country but agriculture
is also contributing towards foreign earning.
1.3 However, this stupendous growth in agriculture was not without

many of unanticipated consequences. A few decades down the road,
it was evident that the benefits of the Green Revolution are associated
with unanticipated harmful effects of chemicals used as Fertilizers and
1
Pesticides. Excessive use of fertilizer and associated chemical pesticides
led to degradation and erosion of soil fertility, loss of bio-diversity due
to mono-cropping, build up of toxic nutrient in soil, loss of micro-
nutrients and loss of useful micro-organism among other associated
desirable and undesirable effects. Now, when our country is planning
and implementing strategy for initiating a new phase of green revolution,
it is pertinent to examine pros and cons of earlier strategy based on
use of chemical fertilizer and pesticides in order to incorporate suitable
changes to save our precious natural resources without jeopardising
agricultural growth.
Green Revolution Impact on Agricultural Growth in India
1.4 Strategy of Green Revolution was based upon seed-fertilizer-

irrigation wherein, high yielding varieties of seeds were used for
enhancing agricultural production and productivity with generous
application of chemical fertilizers and irrigation. In the words of Vandana
Shiva assumption of Green Revolution was based on the notion that
nutrient loss and nutrient deficit can be made up by the use of non-
renewable inputs of phosphorous, potash and nitrates as chemical
fertilizers. The nutrient cycle, in which nutrients are produced by the
soil as organic matter is thus replaced by linear non-renewable flow
of phosphorous and potash derived from geological deposits, and
nitrogen derived from petroleum.
1.5 Strategy of Green Revolution adopted in our country since

1960s has paid rich divident as farmers of our country were able to
enhance food production of the country not just to satisfy our needs
but for earning valuable foreign exchange as well. India has achieved
a remarkable growth in agriculture, increasing foodgrain production
from 83 mt in 1960-61 to about 252.7 mt (fourth estimate) in
2014-15. Fertilizer consumption likewise has been showing a continuous
upward trend, with consumption from less than 1 million tons of total
nutrients in the mid sixties to almost 25.6 million tons in 2014-15. The
Department of Agricultural Research and Education in documents
submitted to the Committee have stated that fertilizers have played
a prominent role in increasing foodgrain production of the country.
About 50 percent increase in agricultural production in the post Green
Revolution era is attributed to the use of fertilizers. The Ministry have
further added that fertilizers are going to be crucial input in future as
well, given the increasing food demands of growing population and
insufficient availability of alternative nutrient sources. The country
will require about 300 mt of foodgrains by 2025 to feed its teeming
millions. This would necessitate use of about 45 mt of nutrients. While
2
about 6-8 mt of nutrients could be supplied through existing organic
sources, the rest has to come from chemical fertilizers. Therefore, the
fertilizer industry has to keep pace with the growth of population and
increasing food demands in the country.
1.6 While analysing impact of use of fertilizers on agricultural

production in the country, it is important to analyse another factor
such as decadal rate of agricultural growth vis-a-vis growth in net
sown area so that exact increase of foodgrain production that can be
attributed to the use of fertilizers be arrived. When asked to submit
State-wise details regarding decadal growth rate of agriculture
(foodgrain production) since 1960-61,the Department of Agricultural
Research and Education submitted that decadal growth rate of
agriculture (food grain production) vis-a-vis growth in Net Area sown
in the country since 1960-61 are as follows:—
State-wise decadal growth rate in foodgrain production

(000' tonnes) from 1960 onwards
State 1960- 1971- 1981- 1991- 2001-

1970 1980 1990 2000 2012
1 2 3 4 5 6
Andhra Pradesh -0.53 3.78 1.93 2.26 4.61

Assam 2.75 1.37 2.17 1.59 1.99
Bihar 12.27 0.39 5.58 2.14 0.95
Chhattisgarh Na Na Na Na 3.00
Goa Na 0.45 47.73 2.55 -2.52
Gujarat 14.66 17.24 -10.89 -1.77 6.26
Haryana 14.59 4.96 4.54 3.82 3.39
Himachal Pradesh 5.17 1.32 3.18 -0.35 -0.42
Jammu & Kashmir 13.48 3.13 0.73 -1.55 1.22
Jharkhand Na Na Na Na 3.76
Karnataka 9.94 2.03 3.83 2.27 5.76
Kerala 4.30 -0.66 -2.56 -5.71 -2.26
Madhya Pradesh 11.08 -0.51 3.34 -2.09 2.99
Maharashtra -1.44 11.07 3.31 -0.56 2.74
3
1 2 3 4 5 6
Manipur -10.95 4.12 0.74 1.82 3.91

Meghalaya Na 3.15 -0.94 4.76 1.02
Mizoram Na -7.71 32.97 2.30 -9.98
Nagaland 1.35 -1.92 34.21 2.91 3.72
Orissa 4.78 1.46 5.28 -4.67 2.40
Punjab 14.49 6.01 3.88 2.54 1.64
Rajasthan 11.50 1.32 2.26 2.74 4.80
Sikkim Na Na 9.02 -1.01 1.29
Tamil Nadu 4.62 -0.10 3.35 -0.07 5.09
Tripura 6.04 4.75 3.40 0.88 2.39
Uttar Pradesh 11.02 3.14 4.11 2.01 1.74
Uttarakhand Na Na Na Na 1.15
West Bengal 9.56 1.10 7.37 1.47 -0.39
All India 8.37 2.78 3.49 1.44 2.61
Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics
Decadal Growth Rate of Net Sown Area in the Country
1.7 Net Sown Area is another important factor which affects

agricultural growth rate in the country. When asked to submit
State-wise details regarding decadal growth rate of Net Area Sown in
the country since 1960-61, the Depatment submitted that decadal
growth rate in Net Area Sown in the country since 1960-61 are as follows:—
State-wise decadal growth rate in the net area sown

(area in 000’ hectares) from 1960 onwards
State 1960- 1971- 1981- 1991- 2001-

1970 1980 1990 2000 2012
1 2 3 4 5 6
Andhra Pradesh 0.26 -0.78 -0.26 0.19 0.95

Assam 0.08 1.46 0.13 0.02 0.26
Bihar 0.06 -0.23 -0.01 0.03 -0.67
4
1 2 3 4 5 6
Chhattisgarh Na Na Na Na -0.24
Goa Na Na 0.62 0.61 -0.70
Gujarat 0.21 0.07 -0.27 0.12 0.80
Haryana 0.91 0.21 -0.28 0.26 0.06
Himachal Pradesh 9.79 0.32 0.12 -0.51 -0.22
Jammu & Kashmir 0.19 0.61 -0.02 0.12 -0.32
Jharkhand Na Na Na Na -2.61
Karnataka -0.13 -0.12 0.43 -0.50 0.00
Kerala 1.28 -0.04 0.34 -0.07 -0.60
Madhya Pradesh 1.48 0.07 0.30 0.00 0.18
Maharashtra 0.09 0.95 -0.20 -0.19 -0.12
Manipur 1.12 -1.33 0.00 0.00 7.52
Meghalaya Na 1.96 0.64 2.54 1.14
Mizoram Na Na 0.00 6.13 1.53
Nagaland 3.49 5.61 1.56 4.92 0.95
Orissa 0.34 0.37 0.42 -0.81 -2.40
Punjab -13.83 0.34 0.02 0.19 -0.28
Rajasthan 0.60 -0.14 -0.16 -0.26 0.77
Sikkim Na 10.63 2.48 0.00 -1.48
Tamil Nadu 1.37 -0.76 0.35 -0.87 -0.22
Tripura 0.99 -0.21 1.30 0.66 -1.08
Uttarakhand Na Na Na Na -0.77
Uttar Pradesh 0.09 0.03 0.00 -0.07 -0.13
West Bengal 0.21 -0.44 -0.41 0.18 -0.57
All India 0.42 0.22 0.08 -0.12 0.21
Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics
5
Availability of Agricultural Land in the Country
1.8 Our country is supporting 16.7% of World Population on only

2.4% of total land area of the World, so it is imperative that we utilise
all available land for production of agriculture so that food security of
the country is ensured. When asked to furnish details of net available
area in the country, the Department submitted that net cultivable
area in the country under agricultural use is 140 million hectare.
State-wise details are as follows:—
State/Union Territory Current Net area Cultivated

Fallows Sown Land
1 2 3 4
Andhra Pradesh 2337 11117 13454

Arunachal Pradesh 38 216 254
Assam 81 2811 2891
Bihar 767 5402 6169
Chhattisgarh 257 4671 4928
Goa 12 132 144
Gujarat 379 10302 10681
Haryana 103 3513 3616
Himachal Pradesh 57 543 601
Jammu & Kashmir 113 745 858
Jharkhand 1440 1406 2846
Karnataka 1822 9793 11615
Kerala 77 2048 2125
Madhya Pradesh 375 15352 15727
Maharashtra* 1418 17344 18762
Manipur* 0 309 309
Meghalaya 60 285 346
Mizoram 50 116 166
6
1 2 3 4
Nagaland 50 380 430
Odisha 949 4386 5335
Punjab 58 4150 4208
Rajasthan 1869 17479 19348
Sikkim* 5 77 82
Tamil Nadu 1308 4544 5852
Tripura 2 256 258
Uttarakhand 51 706 757
Uttar Pradesh 1201 16564 17765
West Bengal 379 5205 5584
Andman & Nicobar Islands 3 15 17
Chandigarh 0 1 1
Dadar & Nagar Haveli 2 20 22
Daman & Diu 0 3 3
Delhi 12 22 34
Lakshadweep — 2 2
Puducherry 5 16 21
All India 15282 139932 155214
1.9 On being asked about conversion of culturable land to

Agricultural land in the Country since 1960-61, the Department stated
as under:—
“As per National Wastelands Change Analysis (Wasteland Atlas of

India 2011: Change Analysis Based on Temporal Satellite Data of
2005-06 and 2008-09), the decrease in wastelands of 3.2 million
hectares was observed between 2005-06 and 2008-09, spreading
over 112057 locations (polygons), while simultaneously an increase
in wastelands of 2.7 million hectares in 42886 locations was observed.
Thus, the net result was decrease in wasteland area to the tune of
7
0.5 million hectares in 2008-09 as compared to 2005-2006, when
aggregated for the entire country and wasteland classes. State-wise
details are as follows:—
State/UT-wise total area under wastelands (square km.) during

2008-09 vis-à-vis 2005-06 and change in wasteland
Sl.No. State/U.T. Total Wasteland Change in

2005-06 2008-09 Wasteland
1 2 3 4 5
1. Andhra Pradesh 38788.22 37296.62 -1491.60

2. Arunachal Pradesh 5743.83 14895.24 9151.41
3. Assam 8778.02 8453.86 -324.15
4. Bihar 6841.09 9601.01 2759.92
5. Chhattisgarh 11817.82 11482.18 -335.64
6. Delhi 83.34 90.21 6.87
7. Goa 496.27 489.08 -7.18
8. Gujarat 21350.38 20108.06 -1242.32
9. Haryana 2347.05 2145.98 -201.07
10. Himachal Pradesh 22470.05 22347.88 -122.17
11. Jammu and Kashmir 73754.38 75435.77 1681.39
12. Jharkhand 11670.14 11017.38 -652.76
13. Karnataka 14438.12 13030.62 -1407.50
14. Kerala 2458.69 2445.62 -13.07
15. Madhya Pradesh 40042.98 40113.27 70.29
16. Maharashtra 38262.81 37830.82 -431.99
17. Manipur 7027.47 5648.53 -1378.94
18. Meghalaya 3865.76 4127.43 261.67
19. Mizoram 6021.14 4958.64 -1062.50
20. Nagaland 4815.18 5266.72 451.55
21. Orissa 16648.27 16425.76 -222.51
22. Punjab 1019.50 936.83 -82.67
23. Rajasthan 93689.47 84929.10 -8760.37
24. Sikkim 3280.88 3273.15 -7.73
25. Tamil Nadu 9125.56 8721.79 -403.77
8
1 2 3 4 5
26. Tripura 1315.17 964.64 -350.53

28. Uttarakhand 12790.06 12859.53 69.47
29. Uttar Pradesh 10988.59 9881.24 -1107.35
30. West Bengal 1994.41 1929.20 -65.21
31. Union Territory 337.30 315.00 -22.30
Total 472261.94 467021.16 -5240.78
Long Term Impact of the strategies adopted for enhancing

productivity during the Green Revolution in the Country
1.10 On the query of the Committee regarding assessment done

about the long term impact of the strategies adopted for enhancing
productivity during the Green Revolution in the Country, the Department
submitted as under:—
“The adoption of new agricultural technologies has resulted into

Green Revolution that helped in achieving of self-sufficiency in
staple foodgrains that is rice and wheat. A study on the issues
related to growth in agricultural productivity was conducted at the
National Institute of Agricultural Economics and Policy Research
(NIAP), a unit of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research,
New Delhi. The concept of ‘Total Factor Productivity’ (TFP) which
is an appropriate tool to examine and understand the growth in
productivity and to separate out effects of inputs and other factors
from output growth or in other words the contribution of
technological change to output growth. Using data on ‘cost of
cultivation of principal crops’ for the period 1975-2005, this study
examined productivity performance of Indian agriculture. There is
a considerable variation in productivity performance, measured by
the growth in TFP across crops. Wheat benefitted most from the
technological change — TFP grew close to 2% per annum. Rice lags
behind wheat. Maize achieved TFP growth of about 0.67%. More
than half of the total growth in output of wheat and around
onefourth in other cereals was due to TFP.
The technology led-output growth has helped in reducing the real

cost of production in the range of 1.0-2.3% per annum during the
study period in case of cereals. The largest decline in the real cost
per unit of output was in case of wheat. Returns to investment on
9
agricultural research have been found to be a highly paying
proposition. The overall internal rates of return to public agricultural
research investment during 1975 to 2005 was estimated 29% for
rice, 38% for wheat, 28% for maize, 39% for jowar, 31% for bajra,
34% for gram, 57% for arhar, 18% for groundnut, 20% for rapeseed-
mustard and 39% for cotton. The share of TFP growth in output has
been found to vary across crops, ranging from 10.1% for rapeseed
& mustard to 58.9% for wheat. The share of research in TFP growth
has been estimated as 55.7% for rice, 40.1% for wheat, 79.2% for
maize, 27.8% for jowar, 74.8% for bajra, 42.2% for gram, 36.0% for
groundnut, 88.6% for rapeseed and mustard and 26.4% for cotton.
Based on these estimates the study has found that about onefourth
growth in output of wheat and cotton, one-fifth in the case of
bajra, and around 13% in paddy and maize have been due to
investments in agricultural research. In most of the other crops,
about one-tenth of output growth has been due to public sector
research. These estimates have been used to provide an idea about
the contribution of agricultural research to incremental out in a
given year. During 1975-76 to 2005-06, annual output of paddy has
increased by 2.32%, of which 0.32% point growth has been due to
agricultural research; in terms of quantity, it comes out to be
0.4228 million metric tonnes per annum. Valued even at the
minimum support price, this incremental output is worth Rupees
241 crores. Similarly, the contribution of research to wheat crop
during 2005-06 has been estimated as 0.5896 million tonnes, valued
at Rupees 636.8 crore. Cotton crop ranks second after wheat in
terms of contribution of research valued at Rupees 562 crore. The
contribution of research to TFP growth for the entire crop sector
has been found as Rs. 3748 crore for the year 2005-06.
An important contribution of output growth achieved through

agriculture research is the reduction in import dependency in
meeting the food requirement of the country and improving the
food self-sufficiency of the nation. It has been estimated that
without the contribution of research, wheat production in the
country in the year 2005-06 would have been lower by 10.4 mt.
and rice production would have been lower by 6.3 mt. The
contribution of research in enhanced production of maize and bajra
has been estimated as 1.09 mt. and 0.64 mt. respectively.
Cumulative effect of agricultural research on output of gram has
been estimated as 80 thousand tonnes. In oilseeds, groundnut
production would have been lower by 80 thousand tonnes and
rapeseed & mustard production would have been turns 5.2 lakh
tonnes lower without contribution of research. During the year
10
2005-06, domestic demand for all the commodities, was much
higher than what would have been the production in the country
without contribution of research and India would have been far
away from self-sufficiency status. Without the contribution of
research, self-sufficiency in wheat would have declined to 83.4%.
This implies that India would have been forced to import 9.8 mt.
of wheat in the absence of research contribution. Similarly, without
research contribution, India would have been forced to import
1.77 million tonnes of rice. Contribution of research in attainment
of self-sufficiency in gram and groundnut has been limited.
The agricultural research carried out during the past three decades
has improved the self-sufficiency status in wheat by 15% and in
rice by 7%. Growth in food production induced by research in India
has reduced the import dependency of the country and has added
to export, which amounts to 17 mt. of cereals — in value terms
this comes to more than four times the annual investment in
agricultural research. It has also reduced pressure on the globally-
traded food commodities. In the absence of contribution of research
in India, the global supply of rice and wheat (quantity available for
export) would have reduced by about 12%. This could result in a
sharp increase in global grain prices causing adverse effect on food
security of a large number of low income food-deficit countries,
including India. The above findings highlight for maintaining for
smooth growth in allocation of research resources.”
11
CHAPTER II
IMPROPER FERTILIZER USE AND DECLINE IN CROP PRODUCTIVITY
2.1 Plant requires nutrient for its growth. These Nutrient can be
classified into macronutrient such as Nitrogen, Phosphorous and
Potassium, secondary macronutrients such as calcium (Ca), magnesium
(Mg), and sulphur (S) and micronutrients such as copper (Cu), iron
(Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo), zinc (Zn), boron (B), and of
occasional significance there are silicon (Si), cobalt (Co), and vanadium
(V) plus rare mineral catalysts. Naturally, Plant derive these elements
from soil. However, natural process has its own limitations and rate of
crop yeild is quite less. Externally, plant can derive these nutrients
from fertilizers. Fertilizers enhance the growth of plants. This goal is
met in two ways, the traditional one being additives that provide
nutrients. The second mode by which some fertilizers act is to enhance
the effectiveness of the soil by modifying its water retention and
aeration.
2.2 Depending upon numbers of nutrients, fertilizers can be

classified into Straight Fertilizers or Multicomponent or Compound
Fertilizers. One-component (straight) fertilizers contains one nutrient
as a major. They may also comprise accompanying ions, respectively
microelements. They are divided into nitrogen, phosphoric acid,
potassium, calcium and magnesium fertilizers.On the other hand, multi-
component (compound) fertilizers contains at least two or more major
nutrients, may include accompanying ions and microelements. According
to the nutrient content they are divided into fertilizers — double ones
containing 2 major nutrients (NP, NK, PK), triple (full), fertilizers with
micronutrients and special group consists of fertilizers containing
sulphur.
2.3 Use of fertilizer in agriculture requires a scientific approach

and its application should be based on scientific testing of soil. Only
specific fertilizer should be used in field to augment missing or deficient
nutrient in soil. However, use of fertilizers in our country was hardly
scientific and done without knowing soil requirement based on scientific
soil test. Further, there was indiscriminate use of Urea due to subsidy
policy of the Government. Over reliance on Urea and improper nutrient
management has led to multinutrient deficiencies in Indian soils. The
Department of Agricultural research and Education in their background
note submitted to the Committee stated that in the early sixties,
12
when fertilizer responsive varieties were introduced in India, optimum
yields could be obtained with the application of nitrogenous fertilizers
alone. However, the bumper harvests soon depleted other nutrients
and their deficiencies started showing up. With nutrient application/
additions never keeping pace with their removals by crops, the fertility
status of Indian soils has been declining fast under intensive agriculture
and are now showing signs of fatigue, especially in the Indo-Gangetic
plain. The partial factor productivity has gone down, necessitating
additional inputs to obtain similar crop yields. Declining soil fertility
is often cited as one of the reasons for stagnating or declining yields.
The inadequate and imbalanced nutrient use coupled with neglect of
organic manures has caused multi-nutrient deficiencies in many areas
with time. The imbalanced fertilizer use in terms of NPK is evidenced
by their wider consumption ratios of 31.4:8.0:1 and 27.7:6.1:1 against
a desirable one of 4:2:1 in agriculturally important states of Punjab
and Haryana, respectively, during 2014-15. Further, out of total
525 districts in the country, about 292 districts account for 85% of the
total fertilizer consumption. Today, the nutrient deficiencies at the
country level are of the order of 89, 80, 50, 41, 49, 33, 13, 12, 5 and
3% for nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, sulphur, zinc, boron,
molybdenum, iron, manganese and copper, respectively. The continuous
use of high analysis chemical fertilizers (devoid of sulphur impurities)
has made sulphur a limiting nutrient in many soils of the country. The
deficiencies are becoming more critical for sulphur, zinc and boron.
The limiting nutrients do not allow the full expression of other nutrients,
thereby, lowering the fertilizer responses and crop productivity. The
Indian agriculture, presently, is operating with a negative balance of
plant nutrients in the soils.
Fertilizer Use and Environmental Concerns
2.4 Suitable use of fertilizers based upon soil test would have
certainly helped Indian agriculture to harvest bumper crops without
associated negative effects. However, absence of soil test facility and
efforts to educate the farmers,indiscriminate use of Nitrogen fertilizers
have led to multiple problems affecting soil health and overall
environment. The Department of Agricultural Research and Education
in their background note submitted to the Committtee the following
negative effects of improper use of fertilizers:—
(i) Human and Animal Health Disorders
2.5 Inadequate use of micronutrient fertilizers is aggravating trace

element deficiencies in soils in many areas. The crops grown on these
soils are, generally, deficient in micro nutrients. These deficiencies
13
are linked with malnutrition and health disorders in humans and animals.
The problem is more serious in young children, women of child bearing
age and livestock. The Zn deficiency has become a big public health
issue in India and is second in importance to Fe. It is assumed that
around 25% of Indian population is under risk of Zn deficiency related
problems. The dietary intake of 0.2-0.3 mg Zn day1 is regarded as
deficient. Its deficiency impairs the immune system and increases the
incidence of infectious diseases such as diarrhea and pneumonia. It
also causes dwarfism, hypogonadism, anemia, geophagia, anorexia,
skin lesions, rough and dry skin and loss of taste etc. A study in
Haryana on 283 pregnant women has shown 65 % of them to be deficient
in Zn based on low serum Zn concentration. The Zn deficiency related
disorders like parakeratosis disease, associated with bone and joint
disorders and thickening of skin, have been reported from Punjab and
Haryana in animals feeding continuously on forages deficient in Zn.
Likewise, woolshedding syndrome in Corriedale sheep was observed at
the Central Sheep Breeding Farm, Hissar due to Zn deficiency. Iron
malnutrition is yet another problem in many parts of India, where poor
people depend largely for their food on cereals containing low iron.
Iron deficiency is associated with anemia, fatigue, nervousness, reduced
appetite, lower weight gain, sore tongue and memory loss etc.
Deficiencies have been reported in livestock of north-western Rajasthan
and sheep and goats in West Bengal. Deficiencies of Cu, especially in
sandy soils or soils having large content of organic matter, have also
been reported to affect crop productivity and human health in India.
(ii) Pollution of Water Resources
2.6 A concern is being voiced, of late, regarding pollution of

groundwater with nitrates due to more use of nitrogenous fertilizers.
The problem is thought to be more in areas having light textured soils
consuming higher doses of N followed by heavy irrigations. There are
reports of nitrate pollution of ground water above the permissible
levels (10 mg NO3-N/L of water as safe limit in drinking waters) in
agriculturally intensive areas of Punjab, Haryana, Gujarat, Maharashtra
and Andhra Pradesh. Nonpoint source pollution of surface/river water
due to flow of applied fertilizers and pesticides has also been reported.
Split application synchronizing the demand of growing plant instead of
one time heavy dose, placement of fertilizer, use of slow releasing
N-fertilizers and nitrification inhibitors, inclusion of leguminous crops
with deep and extensive root system in crop rotation with shallow
rooted crops are some of the measures recommended to mitigate such
problems.
14
(iii) Greenhouse Gas Emission
2.7 Nitrous oxide (N2O) is a potent greenhouse gas which has been
calculated to have 298 times the global warming potential of CO2 over
a 100 year period. Fertilizer is the largest source contributing around
77% of the total direct nitrous oxide emissions from agricultural soils.
The most efficient management practices to reduce nitrous oxide
emission are site specific integrated nutrient management, use of
nitrification inhibitors, supplementation of nitrogenous fertilizers by
biofetilizers, organic manures, demand driven N application using Leaf
Colour Chart (LCC), intercropping with legumes and use of deep
embedded urea super granules. The mitigation strategies have twin
benefits; first, raising N use efficiency thus reducing the consumption
of nitrogenous fertilizers and secondly, lowering the nitrous oxide gas
emission vis-à-vis global warming.
2.8 On being asked about research done on the impact of chemical

fertilizers & pesticides on agricultural and allied sectors in the country,
the Department submitted as under:—
“The Indian Council of Agricultural Research under All India

Coordinated Research Project on ‘Long-Term Fertilizer Experiments’
has assessed the impact of different combination of chemical
fertilizers (NPK) on soil health and crop productivity in different
soil types (fixed locations) under dominant cropping systems. The
investigation over the last few decades indicated that inadequate
and imbalanced use of nutrients and low use of organic manures
may cause deterioration of soil health including multi-nutrient
deficiencies affecting crop yields. Continuous use of nitrogenous
fertilizer alone produced the highest decline in crop yields at
almost all the locations showing deficiencies of other nutrients.
Even in NPK fertilized system, the deficiency of micro and secondary
nutrients surfaced after few years affecting crop productivity. Only
integrated use of optimal dose of NPK and organic manure
maintained soil health/quality with higher crop productivity.”
2.9 However, when asked about study made by the Department/

ICAR on the problem of eutrophication of water resources and ground
water pollution due to excessive use of chemical fertilizers, the
Department submitted as under:—
“There is possibility of nitrate contamination in ground water above

the permissible limit of 10 mg NO3-N/L due to excessive use of
nitrogenous fertilizers particularly in light textured soils that has
consequence on human/animal health if used for drinking purpose.
They have also stated that there is no report on excessive use a
phosphatic fertilizers in the country leading to eutrophication of
water resources.”
15
2.10 When asked about action taken on the basis of these research/
studies including the development of technologies to mitigate the
adverse impact of chemical fertilizers and other chemical inputs on
agricultural and allied sectors, particularly those affecting soil health,
human health and productivity, the Department submitted as under:—
“In order to reduce use of chemical fertilizers in the country, the

Government under the component of soil health management of
National Mission on Sutainable Agriculture (NMSA) is promoting soil
test based balanced and integrated nutrient management through
setting-up/strengthening of soil testing laboratories, establishment
of bio-fertilizer and compost units, use of micronutrients, trainings
and demonstrations on balanced use of fertilizers. Recently, a
National Mission on Soil Health Card has been launched to provide
soil test based fertilizer recommendations to all the farmers in the
country. Besides, various schemes/programmes namely National Food
Security Mission (NFSM), Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY), Mission
for Integrated Development of Horticulture (MIDH), National Mission
on Oilseeds & Oil Palm (NMOOP) National Programme on Organic
Production (NPOP) of Agricultural & Processed Food Products Export
Development Authority (APEDA) and Paramparagat Krishi Vikas
Yojana are in operation to encourage greater use of organic inputs
in agriculture.”
2.11 When asked about the steps taken by the Government for
‘sustaining higher crop productivity and better soil health through
basic research and technological interventions’ and ‘enhancing soil
productivity with minimum environmental degradation’, the Department
“The ICAR through Indian Institute of Soil Science and AICRPs on

Soil Test Crop Response (STCR), Micro — and Secondary Nutrients
and Pollutant Elements (MSNP) and Plants, Long Term Fertilizer
Experiments (LTFE) and Network Project on Soil Biodiversity-
Biofertilizers are addressing all soil health and fertility related
problems in the country. The Council through Indian Institute of
Soil and Water Conservation (IISWC) has developed location specific
bio-engineering measures to check soil erosion so as to prevent
loss of top fertile soils. Similarly, Central Arid Zone Research
Institute, Jodhpur has developed sand dune stabilization and shelter
belt technology to check wind erosion. The Council through Central
Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal and All India Coordinated
Research Project (AICRP) on Salt Affected Soils has developed
reclamation technology, sub-surface drainage, bio-drainage, salt
16
tolerant varieties of different crops (namely, rice, wheat, and
mustard) and agroforestry interventions to improve the productivity
of saline, sodic and waterlogged soils in the country. Similarly, the
Council has developed cost effective amelioration techniques for
managing acid soils. Besides, resource conservation technologies
have also been developed for improving soil health and crop
productivity in the country. Recently, a Consortia Research Platform
on Conservation Agriculture has also been initiated. For eco-friendly
agriculture and better soil health, ICAR has also made Biological
Control and Bio-control based Integrated Pest management practice,
a flagship programme.”
2.12 When asked about the role of Department of Agriculture and

Cooperation on implementation of outcome of research and development
on ‘Impact of Chemical Fertilizers and Pesticides on Agriculture and
Allied Sectors in the country’, the Department of Agriculture,
Cooperation and Farmers Welfare submitted as under:—
“Indian Institute of Soil Science (IISS), Bhopal under All India

Coordinated Research Project (AICRP) on Long Term Fertiliser
Experiments is monitoring the soil fertility in different soil types
(fixed locations) under dominant cropping systems. The research
trials over the last few decades indicate that integrated use of
optimal dose of NPK and organic manure can maintain soil health
and give higher sustainable yields. Details of the said Project are
at Annexure I. The Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and
Farmers Welfare have sanctioned a Project to Indian Institute of
Soil Science (IISS), Bhopal in year 2009-10 for preparation of Geo-
referenced Soil Fertility maps in 19 major states (171 districts) to
monitor soil fertility and generate site specific recommendations.
periodic interface meetings are also held with Indian Council of
Agricultural Research (ICAR) on issues of significance to agriculture
such as development of Package of Practices for crops. Department
of Agriculture and Cooperation is promoting soil test based balanced
& judicious use of chemical fertilisers, bio-fertilisers and locally
available organic manures, like Farm Yard Manure (FYM), vermi-
compost and green manure to maintain soil health and its
productivity. In order to promote balanced fertiliser application,
Government is providing grant for setting up/strengthening of soil
testing laboratories, trainings and demonstrations on balanced use
of fertilisers and promotion of micro-nutrients across various Plan
periods. At present, there are 1208 Soil Testing Laboratories with
analysing capacity of 1.28 crore samples per annum. State-wise
details are given at Annexure II.”
17
2.13 Elaborating further on the project, the representative of
Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare stated as
under:—
“...„U◊Ÿ ß‚ ◊Ò¬ ◊¢ ’ŸÊŸ ∑§Ë ∑§ÙÁ‡Ê‡Ê ∑§Ë Á∑§ Œ‡Ê ∑§ Á∑§‚ ÷Êª ◊¥ ∑§ıŸ-‚
¬ıÁc≈U∑§ Ãàfl ∑§Ë ∑§◊Ë „ÒU ÿÊ •Áœ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU– „UÁ⁄UÿÊáÊÊ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬¢¡Ê’ ∑§ ∑È§¿U ÷ÊªÙ¥ ◊¥
„U◊Ÿ ¬ÊÿÊ Á∑§ fl„UÊ¢ »§Ê‚»§Ù⁄U‚ ÖÿÊŒÊ „ÒU– fl„UÊ¢ „U◊Ÿ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑§Ù ‚‹Ê„U ŒË
Á∑§ «UË.∞.¬Ë. ßSÃ◊Ê‹ Ÿ„UË¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê∞– «UË.∞.¬Ë. ∑§Ë ÿ„U πÊÁ‚ÿÃ „ÒU Á∑§ fl„U ¡◊ËŸ
◊¥ ⁄U„U ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU– π⁄UË»§ •ÊÒ⁄U ⁄U’Ë »§‚‹ ŒÙŸÙ¥ ‚Ë¡ŸÙ¥ ◊¥ ‹ªÊŸ ∑§Ë ¡M§⁄UÃ Ÿ„UË¥ „ÒU–
ÿ„U »§‚‹ ¬⁄U ÷Ë ÁŸ÷¸⁄U ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ∑§ıŸ-‚Ë »§‚‹ ‹ªÊ ⁄U„U „Ò¥U– ¬⁄U „U◊‡ÊÊ
«UË.∞.¬Ë. ∑§Ë ¡M§⁄UÃ Ÿ„UË¥ „ÒU ÄÿÙ¥Á∑§ ÿ„U ¡◊ËŸ ◊¥ ⁄U„U ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU– ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ ÃÙ ∞∑§-
ÁÃ„UÊß¸ ÷Ê¬ ’Ÿ∑§⁄U ©U«∏U ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU, ∞∑§-ÁÃ„UÊß¸ ¬ÊŸË ∑§ ‚ÊÕ ’„U ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU, Á‚»¸§ ∞∑§-
ÁÃ„UÊß¸ „UË ¬ıœ ∑§ Á‹∞ ’øÃÊ „ÒU– ß‚ ¬˝∑§Ê⁄U ∑§Ë ‚‹Ê„U „U◊ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄UÙ¥ ∑§Ù ŒÃ
⁄U„UÃ „Ò¥U– ¡’ fl ©Ufl¸⁄U∑§ ◊¢ªÊÃ „Ò¥U, ÃÙ ©Ufl¸⁄U∑§ ¬„È¢UøÊŸ ∑§Ê Á¡ê◊Ê ©UŸ Á¡‹Ù¥ ◊¥, ¡Ù
πı‚ÃÊ⁄U ‚ ÁøÁqÔUÃ ∑§⁄U ÁŒÿ ªÿ „Ò¥U, ¡„UÊ¢ ßŸ∑§Ë ©U¬‹éœÃÊ •Áœ∑§ ◊ÊòÊÊ ◊¥ „ÒU, fl„UÊ¢
Ÿ ÷¡Ë ¡Ê∞– ∑§ß¸ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄‘¥U ß‚ •¬ŸÊÃË „Ò¥U, ∑§ß¸ Ÿ„UË¥ •¬ŸÊÃË „Ò¥U– ß‚∑§ •‹ÊflÊ
‚∑§ã«˛UË •ÊÒ⁄U ◊Êß∑˝§Ù ãÿÍÁ≈˛U∞¢≈U˜‚ „Ò¥U, ©U‚ ¬⁄U Á¡ÃŸË ÃflÖ¡Ù ŒŸË øÊÁ„U∞, ©UÃŸË ‡ÊÊÿŒ
Ÿ„UË¥ ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU...”
2.14 On the query of the Committeee regarding study made by the

Department to assess the impact of indiscriminate use of chemical
fertilizers and pesticides in the country, the Department of Agriculture,
Cooperation and Farmers Welfare stated that no study has been
conducted by the Department to assess the impact of indiscriminate
use of chemical pesticides in the country.
2.15 On the query of the Committee regarding effect of unscientific

use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides on human health, the
Department of Health Research submitted that excessive/unscientific
use of synthetic fertilizers has caused tremendous harm to the
environment as well affects human population indirectly. Chemical
fertilizers caused various deteriorating health hazards in animals as
well. While eloborating upon effect of fertilizers on human health, the
Department submitted that fertilizers contain heavy metals, including
Silver, Nickel, Selenium, Thallium and Vanadium, Mercury, Lead,
Cadmium and Uranium all directly linked to human health hazards.
They can cause disturbances in the kidneys, lungs and liver and cause
cancer. Synthetic fertilizers increase over six times the risk of dying of
cancer types including brain cancer, lymphoma (non-Hodgkin’s
lymphoma, NHL), prostate cancer, leukemia and large intestine cancer.
It can also cause methemoglobinemia. Annexure 1.2.
18
CHAPTER III
PATTERN OF FERTILIZERS USE, FERTILIZER SUBSIDY AND INTEGRATED

NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT
3.1 Fertilizers are one of costliest input which has become a

necessity in Indian agriculture sector. Keeping in view of low economic
conditions of majority of small and marginal farmers, relatively lack
of awareness about scientific fertilizer management and less penetration
of availabilty of soil health card, it become pre-requisite that
Government at Centre and State level take effective and adequate
steps for scientific management of fertilizers in agriculture sector.
This aspect become more important as our country is yet to achieve
self sufficiency in production of different types of fertilizers and India
has to depend upon import to meet the demands of fertilizers. Further,
negative environmental impact of unscientific use of fertilizers also
necessiate the need of scientific analysis and management of fertilizers.
Therefore, economic as well as environmental aspects of fertilizer
sector require us to analyse aspects associated with its production,
import and use in agriculture sector in India.
Requirement, Availability and Import of Fertilizer
3.2 When asked to furnish details regarding total requirement,

availability and import of fertilizer in the country, the Department
submitted the following details:—
Total requirement (consumption), availability and import of

fertilizer in the country
Year Requirement/ Availability/Production Fertilizer Import

Consumption (000 tonnes) (000 tonnes)
(000 tonnes) Nitrogen Phosphorus Total N P K Total
import
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2001-02 17360.00 10690 3835 14525 283 494 1697 2474

2002-03 16094.00 10508 3908 14416 135 228 1568 1932
2003-04 16631.00 10557 3627 14184 205 372 1553 2129
2004-05 18399.00 11305 4038 15343 413 307 2058 2779
19
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2005-06 20340.30 11333 4203 15536 1390 1145 2764 5299

2006-07 21651.00 11525 4440 15965 2704 1373 2076 6153
2007-08 22570.00 10903 3714 14617 3708 1391 2668 7767
2008-09 24909.30 10900 3417 14317 3756 3067 3417 10239
2009-10 26486.40 11624 4374 15998 3488 2850 3190 9528
2010-11 28122.20 12179 4371 16550 4570 3739 3900 12208
2011-12 27790.00 12288 4364 16652 5578 4264 2558 12399
2012-13 25536.00 12237 3823 16060 4801 2797 1574 9172
Source: Fertilizer Statistics of India, various issues
Pattern of Fertilizer Consumption
3.3 When asked to submit State-wise details of pattern of fertilizer

consumption in the country, the Department submitted the following
information:—
Sl. State/U.T. Fertilizer consumption (NPK) in

No. ‘000 tonnes
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14
1 2 3 4 5
1. Andhra Pradesh 3342 2747 3119

2. Karnataka 2335 1531 1641
3. Kerala 303 277 322
4. Tamil Nadu 1265 947 906
5. Puducherry 22 16 16
6. A&N Islands 1.0 1 1.0
7. Gujarat 1733 1342 1565
8. Madhya Pradesh 1892 1869 1901
9. Chhattisgarh 596 602 568
10. Maharashtra 3022 2473 2785
11. Rajasthan 1356 1344 1218
20
1 2 3 4 5
12. Goa 8.0 5.0 5.0

13. Daman & Diu 0.07 0.2 0.1
14. D&N Haveli 1.0 1.0 1.0
15. Haryana 1428 1350 1165
16. Punjab 1918 1972 1713
17. Uttar Pradesh 4258 4651 3842
18. Uttarakhand 166 152 163
19. Himachal Pradesh 51 48 50
20. Jammu and Kashmir 100 110 103
21. Delhi 0.6 1.0 4.0
22. Bihar 1380 1527 1261
23. Jharkhand 171 198 103
24. Odisha 515 490 487
25. West Bengal 1617 1560 1227
26. Assam 276 276 273
27. Tripura 19 25 23
28. Manipur 8 11 11
29. Meghalaya 5 5 5
30. Nagaland 1.4 2.0 2.0
31. Arunachal Pradesh 0.7 0.6 0
32. Mizoram 1.0 2.0 3.0
Per Hectare Use of Chemical Fertilizers (NPK)
3.4 When asked to furnish average use of chemical fertilizers (per

hectare) State-wise in the country since 2009-10, the Department
furnished the following information:—
Sl.No. State/U.T. 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Andhra Pradesh 243.74 240.96 242.92 201.25 220.13 237.23

2. Karnataka 159.91 161.57 193.68 130.34 212.99 231.43
21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
3. Kerala 99.25 107.12 113.20 106.93 153.65 176.15

4. Tamil Nadu 214.80 213.66 214.76 184.21 62.49 40.55
5. Puducherry 961.25 947.74 798.89 607.31 143.05 163.67
6. A&N Islands 41.76 47.89 50.56 40.00 637.65 284.69
7. Lakshadweep 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 28.15 29.09
SZ TOTAL 196.08 198.47 211.13 166.33 - -
8. Gujarat 162.36 158.34 132.44 106.51 164.05 174.68
9. Madhya Pradesh 77.58 84.72 84.03 80.82 119.63 132.79
10. Chhattisgarh 96.59 99.13 105.15 105.73 80.47 78.17
11. Maharashtra 135.57 149.10 137.30 113.04 86.45 92.07
12. Rajasthan 49.35 50.71 55.33 56.12 117.71 125.60
13. Goa 56.88 46.13 46.46 33.01 45.87 54.51
14. Daman & Diu 153.33 203.33 23.33 56.67 53.53 46.85
15. D&N Haveli 52.61 58.18 40.40 40.00 26.19 0.00
WZ TOTAL 98.64 102.46 97.84 87.33 - 67.92
16. Haryana 213.46 208.70 220.07 211.76 85.93 92.61
17. Punjab 236.90 242.49 242.64 250.60 206.91 221.44
18. Uttar Pradesh 167.51 170.13 164.14 180.12 219.41 227.46
19. Uttarakhand 133.20 134.07 147.02 135.69 138.40 150.45
20. Himachal Pradesh 56.58 57.73 54.71 50.34 164.13 159.95
21. J & K 97.53 106.38 86.19 94.39 51.32 53.96
22. Delhi 51.09 9.55 14.87 24.49 - -
23. Chandigarh - - - - 32.96 82.25
NZ TOTAL 181.66 183.87 181.67 191.11 - -
24. Bihar 179.53 188.03 180.48 196.30 162.67 173.58
25. Jharkhand 119.62 101.04 119.84 119.26 169.88 178.65
26. Odisha 94.25 99.07 103.68 96.71 37.70 38.39
27. West Bengal 172.57 177.97 172.91 161.23 57.11 57.49
EZ TOTAL 153.41 158.06 157.45 156.11 126.86 150.91
22
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
28. Assam 59.10 66.60 66.04 65.68 108.51 118.47

29. Tripura 53.18 45.54 50.24 69.13 88.77 125.08
30. Manipur 51.45 18.68 21.92 35.08 50.66 41.15
31. Meghalaya 10.95 14.88 14.04 14.26 44.20 61.84
32. Nagaland 1.93 3.14 3.04 4.44 47.25 0.00
33. Arunachal Pradesh 2.97 2.99 2.42 2.00 5.18 6.34
34. Mizoram 44.47 46.28 12.27 15.17 0.00 0.00
35. Sikkim 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - -
NE TOTAL 46.84 50.39 49.75 51.42 - -
ALL INDIA 140.15 142.52 142.05 131.36 67.92 82.63
Source:- Source:- Source:- Source:- Source:- Source:-

Based on Based on Land Use Land Use State State
Statistics at Statistics at Statistics Statistics Governments Governments
a Glance, a Glance, at a at a
Dte. of Eco Dte. of Eco Glance Glance
& Stat & Stat 2012-13 2012-13
2011-12 2011-12
State-wise Ratio of Consumption of Chemical Fertilizers (NPK)
3.5 When asked about State-wise ratio of consumption of chemical

fertilizers (NPK) as against desirable ratio of 4:2:1 in the country, the
Department submitted the following details:—
State-wise fertilizer consumption ratio against the ratio 4:2:1

during 2014-15
Major States NPK ratio
1 2
SOUTH ZONE
Andhra Pradesh 4.9 : 2 : 1
Telangana 10 : 3.3 : 1
Karnataka 3 : 1.5 : 1
Kerala 1.7 : 0.7 : 1
Tamil Nadu 3.2 : 1.2 : 1
Puducherry 4.3 : 0.9 : 1
23
1 2
WEST ZONE
Gujarat 10.6 : 3.1 : 1
Madhya Pradesh 15.5 : 8.4 : 1
Chhattisgarh 6.6 : 3.1 : 1
Maharashtra 3 : 1.5 : 1
Rajasthan 62.7 : 21.8 : 1
Goa 2.9 : 1.3 : 1
NORTH ZONE
Haryana 28 : 7 : 1
Punjab 36 : 8.7 : 1
Uttar Pradesh 16.9 : 4.9 : 1
Uttaranchal 18.7 : 3.5 : 1
Himachal Pradesh 3.7 : 0.9 : 1
Jammu & Kashmir 4.3 : 2 : 1
EAST ZONE
Bihar 9 : 2.1 : 1
Jharkhand 28.3 : 6 : 1
Odisha 5.3 : 2.1 : 1
West Bengal 2.4 : 1.2 : 1
Assam 1.9 : 0.6 : 1
Tripura 2.2 : 1.7 : 1
Manipur 5.7 : 1.1 : 1
Nagaland 2.8 : 1.6 : 1
ALL INDIA 6.7 : 2.4 : 1
3.6 On the above issue, the representative of Department of

Agriculture, Cooperation and farmers Welfare stated as under:—
“ÿ„U „ÈU•Ê „ÒU Á∑§ œË⁄‘U-œË⁄‘U ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ ∑§Ë π¬Ã Œ‡Ê ◊¥ ’„ÈUÃ ÖÿÊŒÊ „UÙ ªÿË „ÒU–
‚Ê◊ÊãÿÃ— ∞‚Ê ◊ÊŸÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ øÊ⁄U, ŒÙ •ÊÒ⁄U ∞∑§ ∑§ •ŸÈ¬ÊÃ ◊¥ ŸÊß≈˛UÙ¡Ÿ,
»§Ê‚»§Ù⁄U‚ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ù≈ÒUÁ‡Êÿ◊ ∑§Ê ©U¬ÿÙª „UÙŸÊ øÊÁ„U∞– Á¬¿U‹ ŒÙ ‚Ê‹Ù¥ ‚, πÊ‚Ãı⁄U
24
‚ ¬¢¡Ê’ ◊¥, ◊È¤Ê ∞Ç¡ÒÄ≈U ÿÊŒ Ÿ„UË¥ •Ê ⁄U„UÊ „ÒU, ¬⁄U ÿ„U •ŸÈ¬ÊÃ øÊ‹Ë‚, Œ‚ •ÊÒ⁄U
∞∑§ „UÙ ªÿÊ „ÒU– ÁSÕÁÃ ÷ÿÊfl„U „UÙ ªÿË „ÒU– •Ê¬ ‚„UË »§⁄U◊Ê ⁄U„U Õ Á∑§ ∑§ß¸ ◊Ã¸’Ê
Á∑§‚ÊŸ ∑§Ù ‹ªÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ¬Ù≈UÊ‡Ê ∑§ ’Œ‹ ÷Ë ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ «UÊ‹ ÁŒÿÊ ¡Ê∞ •ÊÒ⁄U »§Ê‚»§Ù⁄U‚
∑§ ’Œ‹ ÷Ë ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ «UÊ‹ ÁŒÿÊ ¡Ê∞, „U⁄U øË¡ ∑§ ’Œ‹ ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ «UÊ‹ ÁŒÿÊ ¡Ê∞
ÄÿÙ¥Á∑§ ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ „UË ‚’‚ ‚SÃË „ÒU– «UË.∞.¬Ë. ÃÙ Á»§⁄U ÷Ë ◊„¢UªË „ÒU– ©U‚ π⁄UËŒŸ ‚
Á∑§‚ÊŸ ∑§Ã⁄UÊÃÊ „ÒU– ¡Ù ¬…∏UÊ-Á‹πÊ Á∑§‚ÊŸ „ÒU, fl„U ÃÙ ∞‚Ê Ÿ„UË¥ ‚ÙøÃÊ, ¬⁄U ∑§ß¸
◊Ã¸’Ê Á∑§‚ÊŸ ÿ„U ‚ÙøÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ «UË.∞.¬Ë. ∑§Ë ¡ª„U ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ «UÊ‹ ÁŒÿÊ ¡Ê∞, ÃÙ ÷Ë
∑§Ê◊ ø‹ ¡Ê∞ªÊ–”
Crop-wise Use of Fertilizers
3.7 Perceptible variation has also been observed on use of fertilizer

between different crops. On the query of the Committee regarding
crop-wise fertilizer consumption in country, the Department submitted
as under:—
Fertilizer use (kg/ha) by crop as per the input survey data of

2006-07
Crop N P K Total
Paddy 104.2 38.1 22.2 165.2

Wheat 122.7 46.6 7.3 176.7
Jowar 62.6 34.3 5.7 102.6
Bajra 45.2 9.9 1.1 56.2
Maize 85 32.1 4.8 121.9
Gram 44.4 41.7 6.1 92.1
Moong 49.8 37.5 2.8 90.1
Masur 87.2 69 22 178.2
R&Mustard 64.9 30.8 2.2 97.9
Sunflower 51.8 44.5 9.6 105.9
Groundnut 47.7 47 13.5 108.2
Total oilseeds 55.5 40.5 9.3 105.3
Sugarcane 151.8 57.5 30.1 239.3
Cotton 124.9 52.5 15.2 192.6
Potato 143 120.1 84.1 347.2
Total Foodgrains 99.6 39.3 13.7 152.6
Total Pulses 48.1 43.2 6.3 97.6
Source: Agricultural Input Survey, 2006-07
25
3.8 When asked to submit details regarding use of various fertilizers
viz. Urea, NPK (DAP, MOP) fortified fertilizers with Zn, Boron, bio-
fertilizer, liquid fertilizer etc. by the farmers in the country, the
Department furnished the following details:—
Per-hectare Consumption and Consumption of Fertilizers

(State-wise, product-wise) during 2014-15
Sl.No. State/U.T. Consumption (in ‘000 tonnes)

UREA DAP MOP Complex TOTAL
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Andhra Pradesh 1674.72 282.43 283.25 1208.59 3448.99

2. Telangana 1366.93 189.11 108.59 801.39 2466.02
3. Karnataka 1532.60 515.04 362.89 1138.65 3549.18
4. Kerala 158.79 24.58 95.63 138.05 417.05
5. Tamil Nadu 990.82 242.48 293.77 493.68 2020.75
6. Puducherry 14.66 1.34 2.59 5.78 24.37
7. A&N Islands 0.58 0.58 0.30 0.60 2.06
8. SZ TOTAL 5739.10 1255.56 1147.02 3786.74 11928.42
9. Gujarat 2236.97 468.79 132.92 470.17 3308.85
10. Madhya Pradesh 2017.28 885.71 78.20 213.63 3194.82
11. Chhattisgarh 675.75 271.58 84.46 66.63 1098.42
12. Maharashtra 2590.33 584.04 451.91 1586.75 5213.03
13. Rajasthan 1830.54 551.55 10.09 58.84 2451.02
14. Goa 3.56 1.52 0.71 2.56 8.35
15. Daman & Diu 0.28 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.34
16. D&N Haveli 0.99 0.96 0.00 0.00 1.95
WZ TOTAL 9355.70 2764.21 758.29 2398.58 15276.78
17. Haryana 1999.95 490.70 51.46 36.10 2578.21
18. Punjab 2673.50 658.70 55.10 28.10 3415.40
19. Uttar Pradesh 6080.66 1536.77 204.33 574.02 8395.78
20. Uttarakhand 279.66 25.53 1.78 38.50 345.47
26
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
21. Himachal Pradesh 69.59 0.00 9.66 23.00 102.25

22. Jammu and Kashmir 115.93 63.71 24.53 2.02 206.19
23. Delhi 9.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.09
24. Chandigarh 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
NZ TOTAL 11228.38 2775.41 346.86 701.74 15052.39
25. Bihar 1940.40 352.71 153.72 262.05 2708.88
26. Jharkhand 180.18 27.13 0.64 26.19 234.14
27. Odisha 505.99 152.83 91.92 239.23 989.97
28. West Bengal 1312.34 255.98 233.70 862.38 1802.02
EZ TOTAL 3938.91 788.65 479.98 1389.85 5735.01
29. Assam 299.53 33.62 110.36 0.00 443.51
30. Tripura 16.75 2.30 6.26 0.00 25.31
31. Manipur 22.41 3.90 3.24 0.00 29.55
32. Meghalaya 0.28 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.34
33. Nagaland 1.71 1.22 0.58 0.60 4.11
34. Arunachal Pradesh 0.97 0.15 0.25 0.00 1.37
35. Mizoram 6.23 0.50 0.49 0.00 7.22
NE TOTAL 347.88 41.73 121.20 0.60 511.41
ALL INDIA 30609.97 7625.56 2853.35 8277.51 48504.01
Source: State Government
3.9 On the query of the Committee regarding amount of fertilizers

absorbed by the plants, the Department submitted as under:—
“The efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen is only 30-40% in rice and

50-60% in other cereals, while the efficiency of fertilizer phosphorus
is 15-20% in most crops. The efficiency of K is 60-80%, while that
for S is 8-12%. As regards the micronutirents, the efficiency of
most of them is below 5%.”

Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare stated as under:—
“...∞∑§ •ÊÒ⁄U ’ÊÃ „ÒU, Á¡‚ ¬⁄U ‚ „U◊Ê⁄UÊ äÿÊŸ Ÿ„UË¥ „U≈UŸÊ øÊÁ„U∞– „U◊ ÷ÍÁ◊ ◊¥ ‚
¡Ù ÷Ë ¬ıœÊ ÿÊ »§‚‹ ©UªÊ∑§⁄U ©U‚◊¥ ‚ ¬ıÁc≈U∑§ Ãàfl ÁŸ∑§Ê‹Ã „Ò¥U, ∑§◊ ‚ ∑§◊
27
©UÃŸÊ „UË ¬ıÁc≈U∑§ Ãàfl „U◊¥ flÊ¬‚ ©U‚◊¥ «UÊ‹ŸÊ „ÒU– ©U‚ ¡ÒÁfl∑§ πÊŒ ∑§ ◊Êäÿ◊
‚ «UÊ‹ŸÊ „ÒU ÿÊ ⁄UÊ‚ÊÿÁŸ∑§ πÊŒ ∑§ ◊Êäÿ◊ ‚ «UÊ‹ŸÊ „ÒU, fl„U ŒÍ‚⁄UË ’ÊÃ „ÒU– ◊ÈÅÿ
’ÊÃ ÿ„U „ÒU Á∑§ ¬ıÁc≈U∑§ Ãàfl „U◊¥ flÊ¬‚ «UÊ‹ŸÊ „ÒU, Ÿ„UË¥ ÃÙ ÷ÍÁ◊ ©Ufl¸⁄UÊ ‡ÊÁÄÃ ∑§◊
„UÙÃË ¡Ê∞ªË– ∑§ß¸ ∞‚Ë »§‚‹¥ „Ò¥U, ¡Ù ÷ÍÁ◊ ‚ ¬ıÁc≈U∑§ Ãàfl Áπ¢øÃ „Ò¥U, ©U‚◊¥ ◊≈U‹
∑¢§≈¥U≈U ÷Ë „UÙÃÊ „ÒU •ÊÒ⁄U ’Ê∑§Ë ¬ıÁc≈U∑§ Ãàfl ÷Ë „UÙÃ „Ò¥U– ‚÷Ë øË¡¥ ∑§fl‹ πÊŒ ‚
Ÿ„UË¥ •Ê ¬ÊÃË „Ò¥U– ß‚◊¥ ∑È§¿U ⁄UÊ‚ÊÿÁŸ∑§ πÊŒ «UÊ‹ŸÊ ÷Ë ¡M§⁄UË „UÙÃÊ „ÒU–...”
Integrated Nutrient Management
3.11 Integrated nutrient management (INM) encompassing

conjunctive use of chemical fertilizers including secondary and
micronutrients, organic manures, composts/vermicomposts, biofertilizers
and green manures merits adoption on a large scale. The Long Term
Fertilizer Experiments have indicated very clearly that the response to
the fertilizers could be raised significantly with balanced application
of fertilizer nutrients along with organic manures. The average response
ratios (kg grain/kg nutrient) were 8.1, 10.1, 12.8 and 15.2, respectively
under N, NP, NPK and NPK+FYM. The system enhances nutrient-use
efficiency (which is low for majority of nutrients), maintains soil health
and enhances crop yields and farmers’ profitability. As informed by the
Department, the Indian Council of Agricultural Research has made
significant contributions towards promotion of INM in the country by
running many All India Coordinated Projects throughout the country.
The Council has so far generated GIS based soil fertility maps in respect
of macro, secondary and micro nutrients for 172 districts. These geo-
referenced maps can be useful in monitoring soil fertility, fertilizer
recommendations for balanced nutrient application in various parts of
the country. A user-friendly software has been developed for use by
the soil testing laboratories to have fertilizer recommendations online.
The council has also generated integrated nutrient management
packages for major cropping systems of the country and the information
has been passed on to different states through Department of Agriculture
and Cooperation of the Ministry of Agriculture. The technologies for
the preparation of urban and rural composts (including vermicompost,
Bio-enriched compost, phosphocompost), green manuring, and crop
residue recycling etc. have been standardized and demonstrated
successfully on various crops. Promising strains of N fixers (Rhizobium,
Blue Green Algae, Azolla-Anabaena association, Azospirillum and
Azotobacter etc.), Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria and Mycorrhizae have
been developed for the production of quality biofertilizers. Liquid
Biofertilizer technology with high shelf life has also been developed.
Resource conserving technologies like fertigation, zero tillage, bed
planting, laser land leveling and Leaf Colour Chart (LCC) techniques
28
etc. are being demonstrated to save costly fertilizers. The Council is
giving special thrust on conservation agriculture practices to sustain
good soil health minimizing green house gas emissions. The Council is
organising workshops and training programmes to educate farmers on
all these aspects.
In order to ensure judicious use of chemical fertilizer and

maintaining good soil health in the country, the Government under the
component of soil health management of NMSA is promoting soil test
based balanced and integrated nutrient management through setting
up/strengthening of soil testing laboratories, establishment of bio-
fertilizer and compost units, use of micronutrients, trainings and
demonstrations on balanced use of fertilizers etc. Recently, a National
Mission on Soil Health Card has been launched to provide soil tested
based fertilizer recommendation to all the farmers in the country.”
3.12 When asked about the policy of the Government of India to

achieve the objective as outlined in Integrated Nutrient Management,
“As soil test based application of fertilizers is essential to improve

soil health and productivity, the Government is promoting Integrated
Nutrient Management (INM) i.e. soil test based balanced and
judicious use of chemical fertilizers, bio-fertilizers and locally
available organic manures like Farm Yard Manure, compost, Vermi
Compost and Green manure to maintain soil health and its
productivity. The policy of Integrated Nutrient Management has
been adopted from 10th Plan period with renaming Fertilizer Division
to Integrated Nutrient Management Division.”
3.13 On being asked about the efforts being made in the Country
to achieve the objective as outlined in Integrated Nutrient Management
System, the Department submitted as under:—

Soil Test Crop Response (STCR), Micro- and Secondary Nutrients
and Pollutant Elements (MSNP) and Plants, Long Term Fertilizer
Biofertilizers are addressing the objective as outlined in Integrated
Nutrient Management System. Accordingly, the Government has
taken up following efforts to achieve the objective as outlined in
Integrated Nutrient Management System:—
(i) Government has taken up Management of Soil Health &

Fertility under National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture
29
to promote soil test based balanced and judicious use of
fertilizers. The scheme provides assistance for setting up
new static/mobile Soil Testing Laboratories (STLs),
strengthening of existing STLs, training of STL Staff/extension
officers/farmers, field demonstrations on balanced use of
fertilizers.
(ii) Under National Project on Organic Farming (NPOF) financial
assistance is provided as credit linked back ended subsidy
@ 33 per cent of total outlay restricted to Rs. 60.00 lakh for
setting up fruit/vegetable market waste/Agro-waste compost
production units.
(iii) Soil Health Card Scheme has been taken up to provide soil
health card to all farm holdings in the country at an interval
of 3 years so as to enable the farmers to apply appropriate
recommended dosages of nutrients for crop production and
improving soil health and its fertility.”
3.14 When asked about workshops and training programmes

organized by ICAR Institutes on Integrated Nutrient Management in the
Country during the last five years, the Department have submitted
following details:—
“• 27 nos. (For details please refer to Annexure III)

• Additionally 140 training programme on INM were conducted
under AICRP-LTFE.”
3.15 When asked about technologies developed by ICAR Institutes

as alternative of fertilizers for achieving the objectives of INM by ICAR
Institutes during the last five years, the Department submitted as
under:—
The ICAR-Indian Institute of Soil Science along with its AICRPs

located at various SAUs has developed following technologies to
ensure soil test based balanced and integrated nutrient management
throughout the country.
➢ Digitized soil fertility maps (Macro & micro-nutrients) for

different States prepared.
➢ Developed ready reckoners for soil test based fertilizer
recommendations.
➢ Launched soil test based online fertilizer recommendation
system for different cropping systems.
30
➢ Documented integrated nutrient management packages for
major cropping systems of the country to promote balanced
fertilization.
➢ Developed bio-fertilizer technology for mass multiplication
and adoption by the farmers.
➢ Standardized Vermi/enriched-composting technology including
bio-enriched compost from various organic wastes.
➢ Identified fungi (Aspergillus terreus/flavus/heteromorphu and
Rhizomucor pusillus) for rapid composting within 75 days of
segregated munucipal solid wastes.
➢ Developed liquid bio-fertilizer formulations and microbial
consortia.
➢ In addition, split application and placement of fertilizers,
use of slow releasing N-fertilizers and nitrification inhibitors,
growing leguminous crops and use of Resource Conservation
Technologies (RCTs) are also advocated.”
3.16 On the query of the Committee regarding ICAR Institute for

engaged in research on INM, the Department submitted as under:—

Soil Test Crop Response (STCR), Micro and Secondary Nutrients and
Pollutant Elements (MSNP) and Plants, Long Term Fertilizer
Biofertilizers are addressing researchable issues related to INM in
the country.”
3.17 When asked about efforts made by the ICAR for preparation
of inventory of good farming practices promoting minimum use of
chemical fertilizers in the Country, the Department submitted as under:
“ICAR has documented integrated nutrient management packages

(Annexure IV) for major cropping systems of the country to promote
INM with less use of Chemical fertilizers in the country.”
Soil Health Card Scheme
3.18 In order to cover all districts of the country, a new scheme

‘Soil Health Card’ has been approved for implementation during
12th Plan. Soil Health Card with information on macro-nutrients and
micro-nutrients will be generated for all the 14 crore landholdings in
a cycle of 3 years. Besides, it also provides an advisory on soil test
based use of fertilisers and amendments. Uniform soil sampling
31
procedure will be adopted by the State for rainfed and irrigated areas.
The scheme will provide assistance to State Governments to issue soil
health cards periodically every 3 years, to all farmers of the country,
so as to ensure that farmers apply the required amount of nutrients
to their crops. Soil Health Card data can always be cross-checked with
the Geo-referenced points used for preparation of soil fertility maps.
When asked about status of scheme of Soil Health Cards in the Country
as on date, the Department submitted as under:—
“Status of scheme of Soil Health Cards in the Country is given

below:—
(i) During 2014-15 funds amounting to Rs. 23.56 crore released

to States for preparatory activities for issue of soil health
cards like training and awareness creation etc.
(ii) During 2015-16 against allocation of Rs. 96.46 crore, fund
amounting to Rs. 72.34 crore have been released.
(iii) Weekly review on status of activities on soil sampling is
being ascertained from States through video conferencing;
so far 45.27 lakh soil samples have been collected by States
against target of 90.57 lakh soil sample during 2015-16.”
3.19 On being asked about the problems and constraints hindering

the expeditious implementation of the Scheme, the Department of
Agriculture Research and Education submitted as under:—
“The major problems and constraints hindering the expeditious

implementation of the Scheme are:—
(i) The States are yet to release their share of funds for
implementation of the scheme.
(ii) Inadequate soil testing capacity and man power shortage in
the soil testing laboratories under State Government.
(iii) Arrangements for printing of soil health cards to be put in
place by States.”
3.20 When asked about views of the Department to improve/reorient

the Scheme so that Soil Health Cards are issued universally at the
earliest, the Department submitted the following suggestions:—
“(i) States to mobilize all staff for collection of remaining samples

immediately after harvest of standing Kharif crop.
(ii) States to make wide publicity for awareness of farmers and
other stakeholders.
32
(iii) Necessary training for soil testing staff to be organized by
States.
(iv) States to train all concerned staff in use of SHC software by
DAC&FW and upload all relevant data.
(v) To introduce 2 shifts in Soil Testing Laboratories.
(vi) Outsourcing of various components of the scheme i.e. sample
collection, sample testing and card printing.”
3.21 On being asked about details of allocation and expenditure

for the Soil Health Card Scheme during 12th Plan, the Department
“An amount of Rs. 568.54 crore have been allocated for the Soil
Health Card Scheme during 12th Plan. So far following funds have
been release:—
2014-15 — Rs. 23.56 crore

2015-16 — Rs. 72.34 crore (against an allocation of Rs. 96.46 crore).”
Soil Testing Labs in the Country
3.22 When asked to furnish State-Wise details about soil testing

labs functional in the country as on date, the Department submitted
as under:—
“As on date 1244 Soil Testing Labs are functioning under the State
Governments. State-wise details are as follows:—
Statement showing State-wise Number of Soil Testing Laboratories

in the country, their Analyzing Capacity, and Utilization during
2013-14
Sl. Name of No. of Soil Testing Laborotories Total Annual Sample Capacity
No. the State Analyzing Analyzed Utilization
State Govt Fert. Industry Capacity in '000' (%)
Static Mobile Static Mobile Static Mobile Total in '000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
I. South Zone
1. Andhra Pradesh 55 5 27 1 82 6 88 413.00 345.785 83.73
2. Karnataka* 56 0 6 2 62 2 64 295.66 194.81 65.89
3. Kerala 14 11 1 0 15 11 26 218.00 134.68 61.78
33
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
4. Tamil Nadu 30 16 1 1 31 17 48 5796.72 4823.54 83.21

5. Puducherry* 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 4.00 4.41 110.25
Total 157 32 35 4 192 36 228 6727.38 5503.23 81.80
II. West Zone
6. Gujarat 132 2 4 1 136 3 139 1412.00 1199.13 84.92
7. Madhya Pradesh 50 7 2 4 52 11 63 378.00 346.52 91.67
8. Maharashtra* 123 23 8 4 131 27 158 2241.35 967.27 43.16
9. Rajasthan 34 22 1 2 35 24 59 536.00 402.69 75.13
10. Chhattisgarh 7 5 1 0 8 5 13 105.00 116.02 110.50
11. Goa 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 23.00 14.96 65.04
Total 348 59 16 11 364 70 434 4695.35 3046.59 64.89
III. North Zone
12. Haryana 35 3 2 0 37 3 40 365.00 247.89 67.92
13. Punjab* 54 12 2 3 56 15 71 631.50 282.11 44.67
14. Uttarakhand 13 3 0 0 13 3 16 106.54 95.23 89.38
15. Uttar Pradesh 255 18 5 3 260 21 281 4159.50 3404.58 81.85
16. Himachal Pradesh 11 4 0 0 11 4 15 125 124.38 99.50
17. J&K* 8 5 0 0 8 5 13 52.00 43.61 83.87
18. Delhi 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 5.00 0.46 9.20
Total 377 45 9 6 386 51 437 5444.54 4198.26 77.11
IV. East Zone
19. Bihar 39 0 0 0 39 0 39 230.00 248.71 108.13
20. Jharkhand 8 0 0 0 8 0 8 40.00 10.67 26.68
21. Odisha 17 6 1 0 18 6 24 270.00 255.06 94.47
22. West Bengal 10 8 0 2 10 10 20 112.40 60.43 53.76
Total 74 14 1 2 75 16 91 652.40 574.87 88.12
V. NE Zone
23. Assam* 7 4 0 0 7 4 11 84.00 60.76 72.33
24. Tripura 2 4 0 0 2 4 6 35.00 17.54 50.11
34
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
25. Manipur 4 4 0 0 4 4 8 40.00 1.37 3.43

26. Meghalaya 3 3 0 0 3 3 6 30.00 27.65 92.17
27. Nagaland 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 45.00 14.30 31.78
28. Arunachal Pradesh 5 3 0 0 5 3 8 9.00 7.86 87.33
29. Sikkim 4 2 0 0 4 2 6 37.00 39.87 107.76
30. Mizoram 3 3 0 0 3 3 6 27.00 25.00 92.59
Total 31 23 0 0 31 23 54 307 194.35 63.31
Grand Total 987 173 61 23 1048 196 1244 17826.67 13517.30 75.83
*Information not provided/not provided correctly but taken previous years progress.
3.23 When asked about the policy of Government to involve private

sector/PSUs/NGOs for establishment of soil testing labs in the Country
and implementation of soil health card scheme in the country, the
“Under the guidelines of Soil Health Management Scheme the State

Governments are free to encourage involvement of other agencies
such as Private Companies associated with Agriculture Extension in
some way such as Fertilizer Companies, Agriclinics, NGOs,
Cooperative Societies and entrepreneurs (Agri-preneurs). The State
Governments will need to announce clear guidelines involving these
private sector agencies in the operation and management of these
Soil Testing labs. State Governments are encouraged to announce
innovative PPP Guidelines for involvement of Private sector for
running of these Labs. The guidelines should, inter alia, clearly
define all the terms and conditions including the soil testing charges
to be charged from farmers and the MoU/Agreement to be signed
with these private agencies, clear cut monitorable targets. State
Governments will monitor and review performance of these private
sector labs periodically. Apart from above the States can outsource
all components of Soil Health Card Scheme i.e. samples collection,
sample testing and card printing.”
3.24 On the query of the Committee regarding provision for training

of farmers under Soil Health Card Scheme, the Department submitted
as under:—
“The Soil Health Card Scheme has provision for training of farmers
@ Rs. 24000.00 per training of 2 days in a batch 30 farmers. Since
the funds have been recently released under the scheme, the
progress is yet to be received from States.”
35
3.25 When asked about under the soil health card scheme regarding
grievance redressal system to address issues such as delay in availability
of soil testing facilities, the Department stated as under:—
“As such there is no redressal system under the scheme. However,

any complaint can be made to the implementing agencies i.e.
State departments of agriculture. So far no complaint has been
received in DAC&FW.”
3.26 When asked about status of soil fertility map, the Department
of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare stated as under:—
“Indian Institute of Soil Science (IISS), Bhopal has compiled soil

test data of 500 districts on available macro-nutrients (N,P&K)
status from different locations in various States between years
1995 and 2008. Out of 500 districts, 465 districts (93%) were found
deficient in available Nitrogen, 457 districts (91%) were found
deficient in available Phosphorous and 259 districts (52%) were
found deficient in available Potassium.”
3.27 On the query of the Committee regarding availability of data

on micro and macro-nutrients in the soil in the country, the Department
of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare stated as under:—
“IISS, Bhopal has prepared Geo-referenced soil fertility maps in

year 2013-14 for 171 districts indicating deficiency in available
macro-nutrients (N,P&K) as well as available micro-nutrients (Zinc,
Iron, Copper and Manganese and Boron).”
Organic Farming
3.28 Organic Farming based upon sound agronomic practices, crop

rotation, use of farm land manure for bio-fertilizers and bio-pesticides
for enhancing soil productivity and use of natural methods and
bio-pesticides to control pests and weeds is an important way to avoid
harmful impacts associated with chemical fertilizers and pesticides on
agriculture and allied sectors in the country. Traditionally, agriculture
in our country was largely organic. However, it was not able to produce
enough food grains to satisfy ever increasing population of the country
and there was gradual shift to use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides.
Still, traditional agriculture based upon organic farming is still practice
in some parts of country. Further, with growing awareness about benefits
of organic farming and demands organic food products of aware
consumers in India and abroad, some progressive farmers and institutions
have started to promote organic farming in the country.
36
3.29 When asked about the role of Department of Agriculture,
Cooperation & Farmers Welfare and APEDA on certification/validation
of the organic crops, the Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and
Farmers Welfare submitted as under:—
“National Programme on Organic Production (NPOP) notified in 2001

under Foreign Trade Development and Regulation (FTDR) Act
(administered by Department of Commerce) defines the regulatory
mechanism for export of organic produce. As a Secretariat to NPOP,
the various activities of APEDA involved in the implementation of
NPOP are:—
• Updating the national standards for organic production.

• Evaluation of Certification bodies for accreditation.
• Accreditation of Certification Bodies.
• Surveillance of Certification Bodies to maintenance of uniform
system of operations as per ISO.
• Bilateral negotiations with the importing countries for
recognition of equivalence.
• Data Management for Organic Products through web–based
traceability system for enhancing the credibility of
certification system has been developed.
• All other activities related to implementation of NPOP
conveying to National Steering Committee (NSC), National
Accreditation Body (NAB) and Technical Committee (TC).
NPOP has earned equivalence with European Union and Switzerland.

USDA has accepted the conformity assessment system of NPOP.
This means that any produce certified by Indian agencies can be
exported to these countries without the requirement of
recertification.”
3.30 On the query of the Committee regarding mechanism to verify

and validate the organic crops as well as its role in marketing and
measures for marketing the same, the Department of Agriculture and
Cooperation submitted as under:—
“The modalities of operations under NPOP are as follows:
(i) The accredited Certification Bodies under NPOP carry out

the inspections of the operations of all registered operators
under them to verify the compliance to the requirements of
the production standards under NPOP.
37
(ii) When all the standard requirements are met in the entire
chain of operations by the operators (Production, Processing
& trading) the products are certified as organic.
(iii) Certification Bodies provide scope certificates every year to
the operators after verification for the Products that are
produced as per NPOP standards.
(iv) For any sale of the certified product a Transaction Certificate
(TC) is given to the operator. The TC ensures the buyer that
the product is organic produced under NPOP.
(v) To maintain the traceability of the certified products flow,
APEDA has introduced ‘TRACENET’, a web based Traceability
system. The scope and transaction certificates are issued
electronically through TRACENET by the accredited
Certification Bodies.
(vi) All certificates issued by the Certification Bodiess on
TRACENET bear a bar code for verifying the authenticity of
the product certified.”
Incentives to encourage Organic Farming
3.31 When asked about incentives being provided to the farmers

to encourage organic farming the Country, the Department of
Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare submitted as under:—
“The Government is providing financial assistance @ 25% of total

financial outlay, subject to a ceiling of Rs. 40 lakh to individuals/
private agencies for bio-fertilizer production units. 100% assistance
is provided to State Government/Government Agencies up to a
maximum limit of Rs. 160 lakh per unit as Capital Investment
subsidy for setting up bio-fertilizer units of up to 200 Tonnes Per
Annum (TPA) production capacity. As on March 2014, 50 bio-fertilizer
production units have been established under the scheme with
production capacity of 12563 Tonnes Per Annum.”
“Besides This, Government has launched the Paramparagat Krishi

Vikas Yojana (PKVY) under NMSA which is being implemented by
DAC, through which assistance is provided for Organic Farming.
Under PKVY, it is proposed to develop 10,000 clusters with a cluster
size of 50 acres so as to increase certified area by 5 lakh acre in
next 3 years and to develop potential markets for organic products.”
3.32 When asked to furnish details of coverage area and production

of organic farming in the Country, the Department submitted as under:—
“Certified area under Organic Farming, excluding wild harvest, is

7.23 lakh hectare during 2013-14 as reported by APEDA.”
38
Certification of Organic Farming Produce
3.33 On the query of the Committee regarding agencies responsible

for certification of organic farming produce in the Country and the
details of certification done by these agencies during the last three
years, the Department submitted as under:—
“APEDA, Ministry of Commerce, Government of India is the agency

which is authorized for the third party certification for the organic
products for the Export.”
Use of bio-fertilizers
3.34 A bio-fertilizer is a substance which contains living micro-

organisms which, when applied to seeds, plant surfaces, or soil,
colonizes the rhizosphere or the interior of the plant and promotes
growth by increasing the supply or availability of primary nutrients to
the host plant. Bio-fertilizers add nutrients through the natural processes
of nitrogen fixation, solubilizing phosphorus, and stimulating plant
growth through the synthesis of growth-promoting substances.
Bio-fertilizers such as Rhizobium, Azotobacter, Azospirilium and Blue
Green Algae (BGA) have been in use a long time. Bio-fertilizers can be
expected to reduce the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Bio-
fertilizers provide eco-friendly organic agro-input and are more cost-
effective than chemical fertilizers. they are extremely advantageous
in enriching soil fertility and fulfilling plant nutrient requirements by
supplying the organic nutrients through micro-organism and their
byproducts. Hence, bio-fertilizers do not contain any chemicals which
are harmful to the living soil. On the query of the Committee regarding
use of bio-fertilizer by the farmers in the country, the Department
submitted the following details regarding use of bio-fertilizers (carrier
and liquid based) in the country:—
Sl.No. State 2014-15

Carrier based (MT) Liquid (KL)
1 2 3 4
1. A & N Islands 0.0000 0.0000

2. Andhra Pradesh 2668.8000 274.8560
3. Daman & Diu 0.0000 0.0000
4. Karnataka 16462.6200 23.0561
5. Kerala 4916.9700 10.5096
39
1 2 3 4
6. Lakshadweep 0.0000 0.0000

7. Pondicherry 560.9500 1.4976
8. Tamil Nadu 15373.2900 11.3017
Total 39982.6300 321.2210
1. Chhattisgarh 1024.680 9.620
2. Gujarat 3667.929 2800.500
3. Goa 802.520 0.000
4. Madhya Pradesh 2637.990 119.216
5. Maharashtra 14847.397 324.767
6. Rajasthan 599.898 0.000
7. D & N Haveli 0.000 0.000
Total 23580.414 3254.103
1. Delhi 104.500 0.000
2. Chandigarh 0.000 0.000
3. Haryana 872.955 46.489
4. Himachal Pradesh 0.768 33.070
5. Jammu and Kashmir 0.000 0.000
6. Punjab 6305.453 74.278
7. Uttar Pradesh 4099.068 98.036
8. Uttarakhand 2129.952 208.034
Total 13512.696 459.907
1. Bihar 64.90 0.00
2. Jharkhand 9.08 0.00
3. Odisha 1074.46 4.70
4. West Bengal 2061.83 14.63
Total 3210.27 19.33
1. Arunachal Pradesh 59.000 0.000
2. Assam 88.000 0.000
3. Manipur 0.000 0.000
40
1 2 3 4
4. Meghalaya 0.000 0.000

5. Mizoram 3.600 0.000
6. Nagaland 7.450 0.000
7. Sikkim 12.400 0.000
8. Tripura 240.000 0.000
Total 410.450 0.000
Grand Total 80696.45595 4054.563711
Source: Compiled by NCOF (Data Provided by Production Units/State Governments/

RCOFs
Policy for Promotion of Use of Bio-Fertilizers
3.35 When asked about provision of the Government incentive to

enhance use of bio-fertilizers, liquid fertilizers, organic manures, etc.
in the country, the Department submitted the following details of
assistance being provided to the farmers under Soil Health Management
component of National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture:—
(a) For setting up of Input Production Units: 100% assistance to

State Government/Government Agencies upto a maximum
limit of Rs. 190.00 lakh/unit for 3000 TPA production unit
under PKVY scheme.
(b) For setting up of State of art liquid/carrier based Bio-
fertilizer/Bio-pesticide units: 100% assistance to State
Government/Government Agencies upto a maximum limit of
Rs. 160.00 lakh/unit for 200 TPA production unit.
3.36 When asked about steps being taken to promote use of bio-
fertilizers among farmers, the Department stated that the Government
is providing the following incentives to investors in infrastructure,
manufacturing, quality assurance and farmers under National Mission
for Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA) for setting up of bio-fertilizer and
Organic Fertilizer testing Quality Control Laboratory, Assistance up to
Rs. 85 lakh maximum for new laboratory. Under PKVY scheme, to
promote use of bio-fertilizers among farmers, the provision of action
plan to adopt the cluster based organic farming by adopting integrated
manure management for Rs. 3.75 lakh per cluster in three years will
be provided to farmers.
41
Subsidy Policy on Fertilizer
3.37 Since independence, the Government of India has been

regulating sale, pricing and quality of fertilizers in the country to
ensure adequate and timely availability of fertilizers at affordable
price to farmers for maximizing agricultural production in the country
and also food security for the people. Keeping this objective in mind,
GoI passed the Fertilizer Control Order (FCO) under Essential
Commodities Act (EC Act) in the year 1957. To regulate the distribution
of fertilizers, the Movement Control Order was passed in 1973. At
present Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare is
dealing with FCO and the movement of fertilizers is being controlled
by DOF in consultation and inputs from DAC and the State Governments.
Subsidy on Urea
3.38 The concession rate of indigenous urea is determined on the

basis of Modified NPS and New Investment Policy 2008. The difference
in concession rate/Cost of import and net market realization is given
as subsidy by the Government of India to the Farmers through fertilizer
industry. Maximum Retail Price (MRP) of urea is statutorily controlled
by the Government of India, which is at present, Rs. 5360 per MT
exclusive of local taxes and levies. The MRP also includes Rs. 180 per
MT and Rs. 200 per MT as dealer Margin for PSUs/Privately owned
companies and cooperatives respectively and Rs. 50 per MT to retailers
for confirmation on mFMS. The Government of India also reimburses
the cost of transportation of urea subsidy from plant/port to the block
level in form of freight subsidy.
3.39 When asked to provide details of subsidy on import and

indigenous production of fertilizers in the country since 2009-10, the
Department furnished following information:—
(Rupees in crores)
Year Imported Indigenous Total Decontrolled Total

Urea Urea P and K Subsidy on
Fertilizers
1 2 3 4 5 6
2009-10 4603.00 17580 22183 39081 61,264

2010-11 6454.00 15081 24335 41500 65837
2011-12 13716.00 20208 37683 36089 70013
42
1 2 3 4 5 6
2012-13 15133.00 20000 35133 30480 65613

2013-14 11538.00 26500 38038 29301 67339
2014-15 (RE) 12100.00 38200 50300 20667 70967
2015-16 12300.00 38200 50500 20667 71167
Source: Central Statistical Organization (CSO)
3.40 The Department of Fertilizer in their background note

submitted that subsidy was reported to have been introduced during
1977 for phosphate due to its high prices in the international market
at that time. Government had introduced Retention Price Scheme (RPS)
for nitrogenous fertilizers in November 1977. Subsequently, RPS was
extended to phosphatic and other complex fertilizers from February
1979 and to Single Super Phosphate from May 1982, which continued
up to 1991. Subsidy, later on, was also extended to imported phosphatic
and potassic fertilizers.
3.41 The Department stated that Concession Scheme on decontrolled

Phosphatic and Potassic (P&K) fertilizers was implemented w.e.f.
1st April, 2008 after approval of the Cabinet Committee on Economic
Affairs. Under the concession scheme the MRP of P&K fertilizers was
fixed by Government of India and the difference in the delivered price
of fertilizers at the farm gate and MRP was compensated by the
Government as subsidy to the Manufacturers/Importers. With changed
parameters from time to time and revision of MRPs of DAP, MOP, MAP
and complex fertilizers concession scheme was continued upto
31.3.2010. During implementation of the said Concession Scheme, the
following drawbacks were observed:—
(i) Subsidy implication was very high;

(ii) Marginal response of agricultural productivity to additional
fertilizer usage in the country had fallen sharply, leading to
near stagnation in agricultural productivity and consequently
agricultural production;
(iii) The fertilizer sector failed to attract investments;
(iv) Innovation in fertilizer sector suffered, as very few products
were introduced by fertilizer companies; and
43
(v) The industry failed to focus on farmers leading to poor farm
extension services which were necessary to educate farmers
about the modern fertilizer application techniques, soil
health and promote soil test based application of soil and
crop specific fertilizers.
Fertilizer Management Strategies and Nutrient Based Subsidy for

P & K fertilizers
3.42 Management of soil fertility is going to be crucial to supply

adequate amounts of nutrients for the targeted levels of food
production. This warrants sound growth and infrastructure of fertilizer
industry, fertilizer pricing and subsidy patterns and balanced &
integrated nutrient management systems for varying soil and crop
situations. When asked about the view of the Government for
restructuring fertilizer pricing and subsidy, the Department have stated
that the Government is committed to supply fertilizers to the farmers
at affordable prices and, accordingly, provides subsidy on certain
fertilizers. At the same time, the Government is concerned over the
large fiscally unsustainable subsidy bill. The pricing pattern of fertilizers,
hitherto, has also contributed to imbalanced fertilizer use and
deterioration of soil health. Therefore, restructuring of fertilizer pricing
and subsidy, providing for reduction in subsidy and promotion of
balanced fertilizer use, became quite relevant. The Government of
India has, accordingly, taken historical policy decision of introduction
of Nutrient Based Subsidy (NBS) w.e.f. 1.4.2010. Under the NBS policy
a fixed subsidy, decided on annual basis, is provided on each subsidized
P&K fertilizers depending upon its nutrient content. The subsidy rates
are fixed taking into consideration all factors including the prevailing
international and domestic prices, inventory levels and exchange rate.
The Maximum Retail Prices of P&K fertilizers are open and are allowed
to be fixed by the fertilizer companies at reasonable rates. The move
would broaden the basket of fertilizers and enable fertilizer use as per
soil and crop requirements. Primary nutrients, viz., N, P and K and
nutrient Sulphur ‘S’ contained in the fertilizers are eligible for NBS.
The NBS to be paid on each nutrient, viz. N, P, K and S, will be decided
annually by the Government and will be converted into subsidy per
tonne for each subsidized fertilizer. Additional subsidy for fertilizers
fortified with zinc and boron will be paid at the rate of Rs. 500 and
Rs. 300 per tonne, respectively. The Government of India has also
included SSP under NBS w.e.f. 1.5.2010 to promote its use. The
Government is also promoting customized fertilizers based on area and
crop specificities. Permission for manufacture and sale of customized
fertilizers shall be granted to the manufacturing companies whose
annual turnover is Rs. 500 crores or above, have soil testing facility
with annual capacity of 10,000 samples per annum and have analyzing
capacity for NPK, micro and secondary nutrients.
44
3.43 The Department of Fertilizer submitted that it was expected
that decontrol of the sector would promote competition leading to
efficiencies in production and import. In the long run, the policy is
expected to stabilise demand and supply situation and also contain the
subsidy outgo, besides promoting balanced fertilization of soil. In spite
of these measures, the major objectives of NBS policy of balanced
fertilization is yet to be achieved. Exclusion of urea from NBS and
decontrol of P & K fertilizers has also led to imbalanced application
of nitrogen vis-à-vis phosphatic and potassic fertilizers (NPK consumption
ratio: 8.0:2.7:1 and 6.8:2.4:1 in 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively).
3.44 While replying to the query of the Committee about effect on

use of chemical fertilizers in the country after implementation of
Nutrient Based Subsidy (NBS) regime, the Department of Agricultural
Research and Education submitted as under:—
“M/s Ernest and Young studied the impact of NBS on use of chemical
fertilizers in the country and submitted the report to Department
of Fertilizer, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers. According to
the report due to the significantly low prices of Nitrogen (mainly
urea which is not currently under NBS region), there was significant
destruction of fertilizer consumption ratio post NBS. Thus, NBS
scheme needs a relook.”
3.45 During the evidence when the Committtee brought the

attention on shortcomings of present subsidy policy of the Government,
the representative of Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and
Farmers Welfare stated as under:—
“... ©Ufl¸⁄U∑§Ù¥ ∑§ ’Ê⁄‘U ◊¥ ß‚ ‚Á◊ÁÃ ∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ¬„U‹ ÷Ë øøÊ¸ „ÈUß¸ ÕË– ◊Ò¥Ÿ ©U‚ ‚◊ÿ
ÿ„U ÁŸflŒŸ Á∑§ÿÊ ÕÊ Á∑§ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑§Ë ¡Ù ©Ufl¸⁄U∑§ ŸËÁÃ „ÒU, fl„U Á‚»¸§ ∑È§¿U Áfl‡Ê·
©Ufl¸⁄U∑§Ù¥ ∑§Ù „UË ¬˝Ùà‚ÊÁ„UÃ ∑§⁄UÃË „ÒU– ß‚ Ã⁄UË∑§ ∑§Ê ◊Ã‹’ ÿ„U „ÈU•Ê Á∑§ øÊ„U ¡ÒÁfl∑§
πÊŒ „UÙ ÿÊ Á‹ÁÄfl«U »§≈UË¸‹Êß¡⁄U „UÙ, Á∑§‚ÊŸÙ¥ ∑§Ù „UÃÙà‚ÊÁ„UÃ ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU– •ª⁄U ©Uã„UÙ¥Ÿ
©Ufl¸⁄U∑§ ‹ªÊ∞ ÃÙ ‚Áé‚«UË Á◊‹Ë ‹Á∑§Ÿ •ª⁄U ¡ÒÁfl∑§ πÃË ∑§Ë ÃÙ ∑È§¿U Ÿ„UË¥ Á◊‹Ê–
„U◊Ê⁄‘U ‚Ê◊Ÿ øÈŸıÃË ÿ„UË „ÒU– „UÙŸÊ ÿ„U øÊÁ„U∞ Á∑§ ‚◊ÊŸ M§¬ ‚ Á∑§‚ÊŸ ¡Ù øÊ„U
©UªÊ∞– •Ê¬Ÿ ÷Ë ◊ÊŸÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚ Á∑§‚ÊŸ ¬⁄U ¿UÙ«∏U ÁŒÿÊ ¡ÊŸÊ øÊÁ„U∞ ÄÿÙ¢Á∑§
•ŸÈŒÊŸ Œ∑§⁄U Á∑§‚ÊŸ ∑§Ù ∞∑§ Ã⁄UË∑§ ‚ ∞∑§ ÁŒ‡ÊÊ ◊¥ ‹ ¡Ê ⁄U„U „Ò¥U– •Ê¬Ÿ ‚„UË
∑§„UÊ Á∑§ fl„U ÁŒ‡ÊÊ ©Ufl¸⁄U∑§ ◊¥ •ÊÒ⁄U ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ ∑§Ë Ã⁄U»§ „ÒU ÄÿÙ¥Á∑§ ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ ◊¥ ◊ÒÁÄ‚◊◊
•ŸÈŒÊŸ ÁŒÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU– »§ÊS»§Ù⁄U‚ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ù≈UÊ‡Ê ◊¥ ∑§◊ ÁŒÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU •ÊÒ⁄U ’Ê∑§Ë ◊¥
ÃÙ ÁŒÿÊ „UË Ÿ„UË¥ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU– ◊⁄UÊ ∑§„UŸÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ÃÙ Á»§⁄U ÄÿÙ¥ Á∑§‚ÊŸ ¡ÒÁfl∑§ πÃË
∑§Ù •¬ŸÊ∞ªÊ– ß‚∑§ ’ÊŒ ÁŒÄ∑§Ã ‚Áé‚«UË ∑§Ë •ÊÃË „ÒU ÄÿÙ¥Á∑§ ß‚ ‚◊ÿ πÊŒ ¬⁄U
‚’‚ ÖÿÊŒÊ ’¡≈U „ÒU, ∑§⁄UË’ xÆ,ÆÆÆ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏U ∑§Ê ’∑§ÊÿÊ „U⁄U ‚Ê‹ ⁄U„UÃÊ „ÒU– ∞∑§
45
‹Êπ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏U ∑§Ë ⁄UÊÁ‡Ê „ÒU, ⁄UÊ‚ÊÿÁŸ∑§ ©Ufl¸⁄U∑§Ù¥ ¬⁄U •ŸÈŒÊŸ ÁŒÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU– ¡Ò‚Ê •Ê¬Ÿ
∑§„UÊ Á∑§ ’Ê∑§Ë øË¡Ù¥ ¬⁄U ÷Ë •ŸÈŒÊŸ ÁŒÿÊ ¡Ê∞– ◊⁄UÊ ∑§„UŸÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ÿ„U ‚¢÷fl Ÿ„UË¥
„UÙ ¬Ê∞ªÊ– ÿ„U ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑§Ë ˇÊ◊ÃÊ ‚ ’Ê„U⁄U „ÒU– ◊⁄UÊ ∑§„UŸÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ∞∑§ ‹Êπ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏U
L§¬∞ „U⁄U Á∑§‚ÊŸ ∑§Ù ’Ê¢≈U ÁŒÿÊ ¡Ê∞ Á»§⁄U øÊ„U fl„U Œ‡ÊË ©Ufl¸⁄U∑§ ‹ªÊ∞ ÿÊ ∑È§¿U Ÿ
‹ªÊ∞–”
3.46 Further elaborating on the issue, he stated as under:—
“... ◊„UÙŒÿ, ∞∑§ Ã⁄UË∑§Ê ÿ„U „ÒU •ÊÒ⁄U ß‚∑§ •‹ÊflÊ ŒÍ‚⁄UÊ Ã⁄UË∑§Ê ÷Ë „ÒU, ¡Ù ß‚‚
ÖÿÊŒÊ •ë¿UÊ „ÒU– ⁄UÊ‚ÊÿÁŸ∑§ ©Ufl¸⁄U∑§ ◊¥ ‚’‚ ÖÿÊŒÊ ’Á…∏UÿÊ Á‹ÁÄfl«U ©Ufl¸⁄U∑§ „ÒU–
‹Á∑§Ÿ ß‚ ¬⁄U •ŸÈŒÊŸ Ÿ„UË¥ „ÒU– ß‚Á‹∞ Á∑§‚ÊŸ Ÿ„UË¥ ‹ÃÊ „ÒU– ÿÁŒ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U Á∑§‚Ë
¬⁄U •ŸÈŒÊŸ ŒÃË „ÒU ÃÙ ©U‚ ¬˝Á⁄UÃ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ „UË ⁄UÁπ∞, ‹Á∑§Ÿ ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ ◊¥ ‚Áé‚«UË
ÉÊ≈UÊ ŒËÁ¡∞ •ÊÒ⁄U «UË∞¬Ë •ÊÒ⁄U ∞◊•Ê¬Ë ◊¥ Œ ŒËÁ¡∞, ‹Á∑§Ÿ ©U‚ ‚◊ÿ ‡ÊÊÿŒ Áfl÷Êª
∑§Ù fl„U ◊ÊÁ»§∑§ Ÿ„UË¥ •ÊÿÊ– ◊Ò¥ •Ê¬∑§Ë ’ÊÃ ‚ ‚ı »§Ë‚ŒË ‚„U◊Ã „Í¢U Á∑§ ÿÁŒ „U◊¥
©Ufl¸⁄U∑§Ù¥ ∑§ •‚¢ÃÈÁ‹Ã ©U¬ÿÙª ∑§Ù ⁄UÙ∑§ŸÊ „ÒU ÃÙ ÿ„UË ∑§⁄UŸÊ ¬«∏UªÊ– „U◊¥ ’Á…∏UÿÊ øË¡Ù¥
¬⁄U ŒŸÊ øÊÁ„U∞ •ÊÒ⁄U ÉÊÁ≈UÿÊ øË¡Ù¥ ‚ „U≈UÊ ŒŸÊ øÊÁ„U∞– ◊⁄UÊ ‚È¤ÊÊfl „ÒU Á∑§ •Ê¬
•ŸÈŒÊŸ πà◊ ∑§⁄U ŒËÁ¡∞– ∞∑§ ‹Êπ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏U L§¬∞ ∑§Ë ⁄UÊÁ‡Ê ˇÊòÊ»§‹ ∑§ •ÊœÊ⁄U ¬⁄U
Á∑§‚ÊŸÙ¥ ∑§Ù ’Ê¢≈U ŒË ¡Ê∞ •ÊÒ⁄U fl„U •¬Ÿ •Ê¬ Ãÿ ∑§⁄‘¥U Á∑§ ⁄UÊ‚ÊÿÁŸ∑§ πÊŒ ∑§Ê
ßSÃ◊Ê‹ ∑§⁄UŸÊ „ÒU ÿÊ ¡ÒÁfl∑§ πÊŒ ∑§Ê ßSÃ◊Ê‹ ∑§⁄UŸÊ „ÒU– „U◊ ¡Ù ÷Ë Ãÿ ∑§⁄UÃ
„Ò¥U, òÊÈÁ≈UÿÊ¢ fl„UË¥ ‚ ‡ÊÈM§ „UÙÃË „Ò¥U–...”

Fertilizer stated as under:—
“... ◊Ò¥ ’ÃÊŸÊ øÊ„UÃÊ „Í¢U Á∑§ ⁄UÊ‚ÊÿÁŸ∑§ πÊŒ ∑§Ë •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ∑§ ’Ê⁄‘U ◊¥ ∑Î§Á·
◊¢òÊÊ‹ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U S≈U≈U˜‚ „U◊¥ ¡Ù ◊ÊòÊÊ ’ÃÊÃ „Ò¥U, ©U‚∑§Ë ‚å‹Êß¸ ∑§Ë Á¡ê◊ŒÊ⁄UË „U◊Ê⁄UÊ
Áfl÷Êª ‹ÃÊ „ÒU– ©U‚∑§ ™§¬⁄U ’¡≈U ◊¥ ¡Ù ‚Áé‚«UË ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU, fl„U ∑¢§¬ŸË ∑§Ù ŒÃ
„Ò¥U– „U◊ •÷Ë ∑§fl‹ ⁄UÊ‚ÊÿÁŸ∑§ πÊŒ ¬⁄U ‚Áé‚«UË Œ ⁄U„U „Ò¥U– fl·¸ wÆÆx-Æy ◊¥ ’¡≈U
◊¥ ‚Áé‚«UË ∑§ M§¬ ◊¥ vv}yÆ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏U L§¬ÿ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÊflœÊŸ Á∑§ÿÊ ªÿÊ ÕÊ, ¡Ù ß‚ fl·¸
∑§ ’¡≈U ◊¥ ||ÆÆÆ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏U L§¬ÿ ‚ ÕÙ«∏UÊ ÖÿÊŒÊ „ÒU– ß‚ ‚Ê‹ ‚Áé‚«UË ◊¥ ‚
zwÆÆÆ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏U L§¬ÿ ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ ∑§ Á‹∞ „Ò¥U •ÊÒ⁄U ’Ê∑§Ë wzÆÆÆ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏U L§¬ÿ »§ÊS»§Á≈U∑§
∞fl¢ ¬Ù≈UÊÁ‡Ê∑§ »§Á≈¸U‹Êß¡‚¸ ∑§ Á‹∞ „Ò¥U– „U◊ ŒÙ Ã⁄U„U ‚ ‚Áé‚«UË ŒÃ „Ò¥U-ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ ◊¥
‚Áé‚«UË ŒŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ∞∑§ Á»§ÄS«U ¬˝Êß‚ „UÙÃÊ „ÒU •ÊÒ⁄U ‚Áé‚«UË flÒÁ⁄U∞’‹ „UÙÃÊ „ÒU–
¬Ë∞Ÿ∑§ »§Á≈¸U‹Êß¡‚¸ ◊¥ ¬˝Êß‚ flÒÁ⁄U∞’‹ „UÙÃÊ „ÒU •ÊÒ⁄U ‚Áé‚«UË Á»§ÄS«U „UÙÃË „ÒU– ÿ
ŒÙ •‹ª-•‹ª ¬ÊÚÁ‹‚Ë¡ „Ò¥U– „U◊¥ ∑Î§Á· ◊¢òÊÊ‹ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U •Êß¸‚Ë∞•Ê⁄U ‚ Á¡ÃŸ Ãâÿ
Á◊‹ „Ò¥U, ⁄‘UÁ‡ÊÿÙ •ÊÚ»§ ’Ò‹¥S«U ÿÍ¡ •ÊÚ»§ »§Á≈¸U‹Êß¡‚¸ ∞fl¢ ∞Ÿ¬Ë∑§ øÊ⁄U •ŸÈ¬ÊÃ ŒÙ
•ŸÈ¬ÊÃ ∞∑§ „UÙŸÊ øÊÁ„U∞– ‹Á∑§Ÿ ÿ„U ⁄‘UÁ‡ÊÿÙ ∑§Ê»§Ë Á’ª«∏U ªÿÊ „ÒU, Á∑§‚Ë-Á∑§‚Ë
•¢ø‹ ◊¥ ÿ„U •Ê∆U •ŸÈ¬ÊÃ ŒÙ •ŸÈ¬ÊÃ ∞∑§ „UÙ ªÿÊ „ÒU– ∞‚ ∑§ß¸ •ãÿ ⁄UÊÖÿ ÷Ë
„Ò¥U– Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ ‚¥≈U⁄U »§ÊÚ⁄U ∞ª˝Ë∑§Àø⁄U ß∑§ÙŸÙÁ◊Ä‚ ∞¢«U ¬ÊÚÁ‹‚Ë Á⁄U‚ø¸ ∑§ ⁄U◊‡Ê øãº˝ ¡Ë
46
Ÿ ∞∑§ S≈U«UË ∑§Ë „ÒU, ©UŸ∑§Ê ◊ÊŸŸÊ „ÒU Á∑§ πÊŒ ∑§Ë •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ øÊ⁄U »Ò§Ä≈U‚¸ ¬⁄U
ÁŸ÷¸⁄U ∑§⁄UÃË „ÒU- SflÊß‹ »§Á≈¸UÁ‹≈UË S≈U≈U˜‚, ∑˝§ÊÚÁ¬¢ª ¬Ò≈UŸ¸, ¬˝Ù«UÁÄ≈UÁfl≈UË ¬⁄U ÿÍÁŸ≈U •ÊÚ»§
‹Òá«U •ÊÒ⁄U ◊Õ«U •ÊÚ»§ ÿÍ¡ •ÊÚ»§ »§Á≈¸U‹Êß¡⁄U– Á∑§ÃŸË πÊŒ ∑§Ë •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU, fl„U
ßŸ øÊ⁄UÙ¥ øË¡Ù¥ ¬⁄U ÁŸ÷¸⁄U ∑§⁄UÃË „ÒU– Œ‡Ê ∑§ •‹ª-•‹ª •¢ø‹Ù¥ ∑§ Á‹∞ •‹ª-
•‹ª ⁄‘U Á‡ÊÿÙ „UÙªÊ ÄÿÙ¥Á∑§ ©UŸ◊¥ ÿ øÊ⁄UÙ¥ øË¡¥ •‹ª-•‹ª „UÙÃË „Ò¥U– ß‚Ë •ÊœÊ⁄U
¬⁄U ©Uã„UÙ¥Ÿ S≈U«UË ∑§Ë „ÒU Á∑§ •‹ª-•‹ª ¬˝Œ‡Ê ◊¥ Á∑§ÃŸÊ ∞Ÿ¬Ë∑§ ¬˝ÿÙª „UÙŸÊ øÊÁ„U∞
•ÊÒ⁄U ©U‚‚ ∑¢§¬ÿ⁄U Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê∞ Á∑§ •‚‹ ◊¥ Á∑§ÃŸÊ √ÿfl„UÊ⁄U „UÙ ⁄U„UÊ „ÒU– fl„U S≈U«UË
ÁŒπÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ¿U„U ⁄UÊÖÿÙ¥—•Ê¢œ˝ ¬˝Œ‡Ê, •‚◊, Á’„UÊ⁄U, „UÁ⁄UÿÊáÊÊ, ¤ÊÊ⁄Uπ¢«U •ı⁄U ¬¢¡Ê’
◊¥ ∞Ä‚‚ ÿÍ¡ •ÊÚ»§ ŸÊß≈˛UÙ¡Ÿ „UÙ ⁄U„UÊ „ÒU– »§ÊS»§≈U ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿÙª •Ê¢œ˝ ¬˝Œ‡Ê, ªÈ¡⁄UÊÃ
•ı⁄U ÃÁ◊‹ŸÊ«ÈU ◊¥ ÕÙ«∏UÊ ÖÿÊŒÊ „ÒU– ¬Ù≈ÒUÁ‡Ê∑§ »§Á≈¸U‹Êß¡‚¸ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿÙª ‹ª÷ª ‚Ê⁄‘U
¬˝Œ‡ÊÙ¥ ◊¥ ∑§◊ „ÒU, •‚◊ ÕÙ«∏UÊ ÖÿÊŒÊ „ÒU, ‹Á∑§Ÿ ’Ê∑§Ë ‚÷Ë ¬˝Œ‡ÊÙ¥ ◊¥ ∑§◊ „ÒU– ÿ„U
S≈U«UË ÁŒπÊ ⁄U„UÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ’Ò‹¥‚ ÿÍ¡ ÃÙ Ÿ„UË¥ „UÙ ⁄U„UÊ „ÒU– •Ê¬Ÿ ∑§„UÊ Á∑§ „U◊ ß‚
’Ê⁄‘U ◊¥ ÄÿÊ ∑§⁄U ‚∑§Ã „Ò¥U? ß‚ ‚¢Œ÷¸ ◊¥ ◊Ò¥ ∑§„UŸÊ øÊ„UÃÊ „Í¢U Á∑§ ÷Ê⁄UÃ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U Ÿ
ÁŸáÊ¸ÿ Á‹ÿÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ‚Ùß‹ „UÀÕ ‚÷Ë Á∑§‚ÊŸÙ¥ ∑§Ù ÁŒÿÊ ¡Ê∞ •ÊÒ⁄U ‚Ùß‹ „UÀÕ ∑§Ê«¸U
∑§ •ÊœÊ⁄U ¬⁄U Á¡ÃŸÊ Á⁄U∑§◊Áá«U«U πÊŒ Á∑§‚ÊŸÙ¥ ∑§Ù ©U¬‹éœ ∑§⁄UflÊÿÊ ¡Ê∞– ÿ„U ’„ÈUÃ
•ë¿UÊ ‚È¤ÊÊfl „ÒU •ÊÒ⁄U ß‚∑§Ù ‹ÊªÍ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ „U◊ ‚◊Õ¸Ÿ ∑§⁄UÃ „Ò¥U– •ª⁄U ‚Ùß‹
„UÀÕ ∑§Ê«¸U ‚ »§Á≈¸U‹Êß¡⁄U ÿÍ¡ ∑§Ù Á‹¢∑§ ∑§⁄U Œ¥ ÃÙ ‚Ùß‹ „UÀÕ •ë¿UË ⁄U„UªË,
‚Áé‚«UË ÷Ë Á⁄U‡Ÿ‹Êß¡ „UÙªË– •Ê¬Ÿ ∑§„UÊ Á∑§ ◊Êß∑˝§ÙãÿÍÁ≈˛U∞¢≈U •ÊÒ⁄U •ãÿ ãÿÍÁ≈˛U∞¢≈U ∑§Ù
’…∏UÊflÊ ÁŒÿÊ ¡ÊŸÊ øÊÁ„U∞– „U◊Ÿ ß‚ ’Ê⁄‘U ◊¥ ∑§Œ◊ ©U∆UÊ∞ „Ò¥U, Á¡¢∑§ ∑§Ù≈U«U •ÊÒ⁄U ’Ù⁄‘UŸ
∑§Ù≈U«U ÿÍÁ⁄UÿÊ ∑§Ù •‹ª ‚ ‚Áé‚«UË Œ ⁄U„U „Ò¥U •ÊÒ⁄U ŸË◊ ∑§Ù≈U«U ∑§Ê ÷Ë „U◊ ¬˝◊Ù‡ÊŸ
∑§⁄U ⁄U„U „Ò¥U– „U◊ ‹Ùª Á‹ÁÄfl«U »§Á≈¸U‹Êß¡⁄U ∑§Ù ÷Ë ’…∏UÊflÊ ŒŸ ¬⁄U ÁfløÊ⁄U ∑§⁄U ⁄U„U
„Ò¥U, ß‚∑§ Á‹∞ ∞∑§ ¬˝SÃÊfl „U◊Ê⁄‘U ¬Ê‚ •ÊÿÊ „ÒU– ∞∑§ flÁ∑Z§ª ª˝È¬ ß‚ ’Ê⁄‘U ◊¥ S≈U«UË
∑§⁄U ⁄U„UÊ „ÒU Á∑§ Á⁄U∑§◊Áá«U«U «UÙ¡ „UÙªÊ •ÊÒ⁄U Á∑§‚ Ã⁄U„U ‚ ß‚ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê∞ªÊ– „U◊Ê⁄UË
ß¢≈U⁄U Á◊ÁŸS≈˛UËÿ‹ ∑§◊≈UË ¡Ù Á∑§ ‚Áé‚«UË Ãÿ ∑§⁄UÃË „ÒU, ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ∞∑§ ◊„UËŸ ◊¥
¬˝SÃÊfl •Ê∞ªÊ, Á¡‚◊¥ ÁŸáÊ¸ÿ Á‹ÿÊ ¡Ê∞ªÊ– •Êª¸ÁŸ∑§ »§Á≈¸U‹Êß¡⁄U ∑§Ù •÷Ë „U◊Ÿ
Ÿ„UË¥ Á‹ÿÊ „ÒU, ‹Á∑§Ÿ ∑§◊≈UË ∑§Ë •ŸÈ◊ÁÃ „UÙªË ÃÙ „U◊ ©U‚∑§Ù ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ
⁄Uπ¥ª– Á¡‚ ¬˝∑§Ê⁄U ‚ „U◊ ∑§Á◊∑§‹ »§Á≈¸U‹Êß¡⁄U ∑§Ù ‚Áé‚«UË ŒÃ „Ò¥U, ©U‚Ë ¬˝∑§Ê⁄U ‚
ß‚∑§Ù ’…∏UÊflÊ ŒŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ÿÁŒ ∑§Ùß¸ •ŸÈŒÊŸ ŒŸ ∑§Ë •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „UÙªË ÃÙ „U◊ ©U‚
¬⁄U ÁfløÊ⁄U ∑§⁄‘¥Uª–...”
Certification for Fertilizers
3.48 Ensuring the availability of quality fertilizers is one of the

major responsibilty of Central and State Government. When asked to
provide information about Government Agencies responsible for
providing certification for chemical fertilizers in the country, the
“To ensure availability of quality fertilizers to farmers, the fertilizer

was declared as an essential commodity in 1957. In sequel, the
47
Fertilizer (Control) Order (FCO) was promulgated in March 1957
under section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act (ECA), 1955 to
regulate quality, trade and distribution of fertilizers in the country.
The FCO has since been revised and re-enacted in the year 1985.
The fertilizers along with their specifications are included in the
FCO after evaluation of their agronomic efficacy. As per clause 19
of the FCO, no person shall manufacture/import any chemical
fertilizer for sale, which is not included in the FCO or not of
standard prescribed in the FCO.”
“To check the quality of the indigenous/imported chemical

fertilizers, samples are regularly drawn by the notified fertilizer
inspectors and tested in the notified fertilizer quality control
laboratories. At present, there are 78 notified Fertilizer Quality
Control Laboratories (FQCLs) in the country. Of these, 4 laboratories
viz. Central Fertilizer Quality Control & Training Institute (CFQC&TI)
and its three Regional Fertilizer Control Laboratories (RFCLs) located
at Navi Mumbai, Chennai and Kalyani are under the control of
Central Government and the remaining are under the control of
different State Governments.”
“There is a provision under clause 14 (3) of the FCO to obtain a

certificate of manufacture from the registering authority of State
Government for preparation of bio-fertilizer. Similarly, there is a
provision under the clause 8 of the FCO to obtain authorisation
letter from the notified authority of State Government for carrying
on the business of selling of bio-fertilizer.”
“There is no provision under the FCO to obtain certificate of

manufacture for preparation of liquid fertilizers. However, persons
desiring to manufacture liquid fertilizers are required to comply
with the provision(s) of the Industries (Development and Regulation)
Act. Any person intending to carry on the business of selling of
liquid fertilizer is required to obtain authorisation letter under
clause 8 of the FCO.”
3.49 On the query of Committee regarding research/study conducted

by respective Government Agencies before recommending any fertilizer
for use in Agriculture, the Department submitted as under:—
“In order to seek advise on the inclusion of a new fertilizer under

the FCO and specifications of various fertilizers etc., the Central
Government has constituted a Committee called the Central
Fertilizer Committee (CFC) consisting of a chairman and ten other
members having experience or knowledge in the field of agriculture/
48
fertilizer. The CFC has further constituted a technical group
consisting of a chairman from Indian Council of Agriculture Research
(ICAR) and other members/scientists/experts from the field of
agriculture.”
“Generally, fertilizer companies submit the proposal to the Ministry

for inclusion of any new fertilizer in the FCO along with its field
trials results. Before inclusion of any new fertilizer in the FCO, the
technical group examines the agronomic aspect, specifications and
field trials’ reports etc. of the product. Agronomic field trials are
required to be conducted by the company in minimum two cropping
seasons under the aegis of a State Agriculture University or any
other institute of ICAR. The report/recommendation of the technical
group on the fertilizer is submitted to the CFC for further
examination. The CFC after ascertaining the agronomic efficacy of
the fertilizer recommends to the Central Government for its
inclusion in the FCO. Thereafter, the Central Government decides
for inclusion of the new fertilizer in the FCO.”
49
CHAPTER IV
USE OF PESTICIDES IN AGRICULTURE SECTOR IN INDIA AND ITS

IMPACT
4.1 Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) define pesticides as

any substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing,
destroying, or controlling any pest, including vectors of human or
animal disease, unwanted species of plants or animals, causing harm
during or otherwise interfering with the production, processing, storage,
transport, or marketing of food, agricultural commodities, wood and
wood products or animal feedstuffs, or substances that may be
administered to animals for the control of insects, arachnids, or other
pests in or on their bodies. The term includes substances intended for
use as a plant growth regulator, defoliant, desiccant, or agent for
thinning fruit or preventing the premature fall of fruit. Also used as
substances applied to crops either before or after harvest to protect
the commodity from deterioration during storage and transport.
4.2 Pesticides are substances meant for attracting, seducing, and

then destroying any pest. They are a class of biocide. The most common
use of pesticides is as plant protection products (also known as crop
protection products), which in general protect plants from damaging
influences such as weeds, fungi, or insects. This use of pesticides is so
common that the term pesticide is often treated as synonymous with
plant protection product, although it is in fact a broader term, as
pesticides are also used for non-agricultural purposes. The term
pesticide includes all of the following: herbicide, insecticide, insect
growth regulator, nematicide, termiticide, molluscicide, piscicide,
avicide, rodenticide, predacide, bactericide, insect repellent, animal
repellent, antimicrobial, fungicide, disinfectant (antimicrobial), and
sanitizer. In general, a pesticide is a chemical or biological agent (such
as a virus, bacterium, antimicrobial, or disinfectant) that deters,
incapacitates, kills, or otherwise discourages pests. Target pests can
include insects, plant pathogens, weeds, mollusks, birds, mammals,
fish, nematodes (roundworms), and microbes that destroy property,
cause nuisance, or spread disease, or are disease vectors. Although
pesticides have benefits, some also have drawbacks, such as potential
toxicity to humans and other species. According to the Stockholm
Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 9 of the 12 most dangerous
and persistent organic chemicals are organochlorine pesticides.
50
Benfits of Use of Pesticides
4.3 Pesticides use in agriculture has many positive as well as

negative effects on agricultural productivity, soil health, quality of
food, pest control etc. Positive effect of use of pesticides in agricuture
includes enahncing the agriculture production in India. Use of pesticides
had been integral part of green revolution strategy in India by reducing
the losses from weeds, diseases and insect pests that can markedly
reduce the amount of harvestable produce. Use of pesticides also
improves quality of crops/vegetables/fruits by avoiding pests which
affects yield, taste and nutritional aspects. However, these positive
aspects of use of pesticides are sometimes become costly due to their
high prices. Pesticides are one of the major input which makes modern
agriculture cost intensive. Apart from that, environmental consequences
of use of pesticides are major factor which makes it imperative to
analyse its pattern of use and take steps to save environment.
Requirement/demand of Pesticides in India
4.4 When asked to submit State-wise requirement/demand of

pesticides in the Country, the Department submitted the following
details:—
State-wise requirement/demand of Chemical Pesticides during

2010-11 to 2014-15 & Projected demand for 2015-16
Unit: M.T.(Tech. Grade)
Sl.No. States/UTs 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Projected

(Provisional) Demand for
2015-16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Andhra Pradesh 10000 9000 9000 5220 4350 4300

2. Bihar 851 870 930 975 1003 1034
3. Chhattisgarh 570 600
4. Goa 8 9 10 10 10 7
5. Gujarat 2700 2100 1160 2300 2300 2300
6. Haryana 4120 4085 4200 4200 4200 4200
7. Himachal Pradesh 335 320 440 523
8. Jammu & Kashmir 3408 4693 1739 1943 2014 1964
51
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9. Jharkhand 99 128 170 173 683 690

10. Karnataka 1700 1750 1750 1800 1800 2400
11. Kerala 633 591 591 581 1149 827
12. Madhya Pradesh 723 906 937 1025 825 817
13. Maharashtra 4315 8554 7855 10894 12663 11280
14. Odisha 811 532 706 1211 1564 990
15. Punjab 6500 6150 6350 6400 6420 6370
16. Rajasthan 2875 2775 2545 2675 2525 2350
17. Tamil Nadu 2472 2089 1968 2208 2141 2100
18. Telangana 4747 4320 4135
19. Uttar Pradesh 8372 8571 8860 9096 10453 10854
20. Uttarakhand 226 284 316 299 236 230
21. West Bengal 3550 3550 4000 3800 3800 3800
Sub-Total 54267 57557 53087 59556 62895 61171
North-Eastern
22. Arunachal Pradesh 10 17 18 18 18
23. Assam 180 190 201 205 215 215
24. Manipur 34 35 35 35 34 34
25. Meghalaya 10 10 34 46 30 22
26. Mizoram 3 3 3 688 1228 1127
27. Nagaland 19 20 22 25
28. Sikkim
29. Tripura 36 472 467 486 474 498
Sub-Total 273 746 740 1497 2022 1940
Union Territories
30. A & N Islands 18 8
31. Chandigarh
32. Dadra & Nagar Haveli
52
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
33. Daman & Diu

34. Delhi 50 53
35. Lakshadweep
36. Puducherry 47 47 47 47 48 43
Sub-Total 97 65 55 100 48 43
GRAND TOTAL 54637 58368 53882 61153 64966 63154
Source: States/UTs Zonal Conferences on inputs.
4.5 When asked to submit about consumption of Chemical Pesticides

in various States/UTs during 2010-11 to 2014-15, the Department
submitted following details:—
Unit: M.T.(Tech. Grade)
Sl.No. States/UTs 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

(Provisional)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Andhra Pradesh 8869 9289 2803 4253 3895

2. Bihar 675 655 687 765 787
3. Chhattisgarh 570 600 812 1016 1020
4. Goa 9 8 9 9 9
5. Gujarat 2600 2190 1210 2330 1840
6. Haryana 4060 4050 4050 4080 4070
7. Himachal Pradesh 328 310 325 344 357
8. Jammu & Kashmir 1818 1711 1789 1723 1921
9. Jharkhand 84 151 151 430 650
10. Karnataka 1858 1412 1615 1735 1709
11. Kerala 657 807 712 1276 919
12. Madhya Pradesh 633 850 846 987 696
13. Maharashtra 8317 6723 6618 10969 11239
14. Odisha 871 555 606 1219 1680
53
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
15. Punjab 5730 5625 5730 5723 5699

16. Rajasthan 3623 2802 2559 2736 1457
17. Tamil Nadu 2361 1968 1766 2142 2096
18. Telangana 3812 2805
19. Uttar Pradesh 8460 8839 9057 10164 9867
20. Uttarakhand 199 206 247 174 133
21. West Bengal 3515 3670 3465 3190 3060
Sub Total 55236 52421 45057 59077 55908
North-Eastern
22. Arunachal Pradesh 10 17 18 18
23. Assam 150 160 183 190 197
24. Manipur 30 33 31 31 30
25. Meghalaya 10 9 24 44 28
26. Mizoram 4 4 4 508 806
27. Nagaland 15 16 16
28. Sikkim
29. Tripura 12 266 272 310 307
Sub Total 216 504 514 1117 1403
Union Territories
30. Andaman & Nicobar 15 7
Islands
31. Chandigarh
32. Dadra & Nagar
Haveli
33. Daman & Diu
34. Delhi 48 48
35. Lakshadweep
36. Puducherry 39 38 41 41 42
Sub Total 87 54 48 89 42
Grand Total 55540 52979 45619 60282 57353
54
Import of Pesticides
4.6 Our country is yet to achieve self sufficiency in production of

pesticides. When asked about details of import of pesticides during
2010-11 to 2013-14, the Department submitted following information:—
Qty. in M.T. (Tech. Grade) Value in Rs. lakhs
Sl.No. Pesticides Group 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Qty. CIF Qty. CIF Qty. CIF Qty. CIF
Value Value Value Value
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. Aldrin i 1053 4339 1034 5539 793 3809 732 3806
2. Allethrin i 2 46
3. Cypermethrin i 17 282 0.41 4 8 20 4 11
4. DDVP i 45 66 24 46 70 99
5. Dimethoate i 58 109 152 299 182 422 46 106
6. Endosulphan i 192 592
7. Fenthion i 0.01 0.02 35 173
8. Malathion i 52 50 0.01 0.02
9. Synthetic i 3 19
Pyrethrum
10. Others i 17257 142478 18388 156952 17157 173226 19563 194422
Insecticides
11. Maneb f 0.02 1 3 18
12. Sodium Penta f 3 37 0.001 0.05

Chlorophenate
13. Thiram f 121 115 97 105
14. Zineb f 3 7 3 9 3 12
15. Others Fungicides f 3958 20107 3976 27648 4554 39665
16. 2:4-D h 204 486 0.48 78 0.001 0.005
17. Copper h 0.80 7 1 2 0.08 1 48 122

Oxychloride
55
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
18. Isoproturon h 23 64
19. MCPA h 46 95 2 3 31 92
20. Other Herbicides h 3775 27693 4689 36838 7107 57625 10056 85938
21. Aluminium fm 187 2183 31 561 23 741 8 61
phosphide
22. Methyl bromide fm 448 955 655 1667 779 2591 460 1652
23. Other Fumigants fm 3270 22010
24. Gibberallic Acid pgr 24 2069 25 2357 27 3311 37 5278
25. PGR pgr 337 633 192 868 280 937 694 1513
26. Disinfectants misc 144 336 98 357 929 2237 1249 2785
27. Paper misc 2 1 18 502
Impregnated
28. Pesticides, not misc 651 1495 2340 7815 1263 6928 2255 13747
specified
29. Repellant misc 43 296 23 194 18 151 23 269
for Insect
30. Weedicides and misc 26 898 39 1648 24 1882 54 3857
weed killing
agents
31. Other Similar misc 25448 81864 26972 97248 32990 128940 37386 158571
Products N.E.S.
Total 53996 287170 58648 340093 65018 405618 77376 512209
SOURCE: (Dte. General of Commercial Intelligence & Statistics, Kolkata)

Note: i - Insecticides, h– Herbicides, f – Fungicides, fm – Fumigants, pgr – Plant growth
regulator, misc- Miscellaneous.
4.7 On the issue of production and use of pesticides in the country,

the representatitive of Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals
stated as under:—
‘...When we talk about chemicals in agriculture, there are two

sets of chemical sectors in agriculture. One is fertilisers and another
is the set of chemicals used under the name of pesticides. They
are pesticides, insecticides, herbicides, weedicides etc. Now,
I would like the Committee to know about the production details
56
and usage details in India. Our installed capacity for production of
agrochemicals – I mean the pesticides and not the fertilizers – is
around three lakh tonnes and our utilisation of the installed capacity
is around 60-62 per cent. Our complete production is about 1.78
lakh tonnes, out of which 50 per cent is exported and 50 per cent
is used in the local market. Then, 0.22 lakh tonnes are imported.
These are the figures with regard to the chemical grades, the final
product of the insecticides, but the per hectare usage of these
insecticides/pesticides is around 600 grams per hectare in India.
We have a total 200 million hectares under cultivation. If we put
the figures together, it comes to about 120 million kilograms of
insecticides to be used. It means that about 12 lakh tonnes of
pesticides are being used. Now, there is a huge variation between
the local production and what is actually being used on ground.
That is being complained about by the Indian industry. They are
coming and complaining that this is being brought in by the
multinational companies and they are not bringing the chemical
grades, but they are bringing the formulation and making the final
product in India and then, pushing it into the Indian market. That
is where all the issues crop us. Hon. Members are telling that some
banned products are found in the market and some multinational
companies are pushing their products. Therefore, the usage is
large compared to what it should be. That explains all the issues
with regard to the usage on ground, the imbalances in the usage
on ground....’
Impacts of Pesticides on Agriculture and Allied Sector in the Country

and on Human Health
4.8 Modern farming needs for achieving higher crop productvity on

sustainable basis with the care on maintaining the health of the agro-
ecologies is the thrust in research in various institutes of the Indian
Council of Agricultural Research. Agro-chemicals do form the hub in
the accelerated crop commodity production to satiate the ever-
increasing consumer demand for food, fodder and fibre. While fertilizers
have been placed as the noble support for higher farm productivity,
chemicals for crop health management have not been accepted in the
same vein. The production capacity of pesticide in the country is more
than 1,50,000 metric tones annually (Industry source) with more than
219 technical grade/manufacturing units and over 4000 formulation
Units. The produciton of pesticides in the country has come down to
nearly 70,000 MT, during 2011-12, in last five years; when it was more
than 80,000MT. There may be around 500 pesticides formulators spread
in the county. The projected demand for technical grade chemical and
biopesticides for the year 2012-13 was around 55,000 and 8000 MT,
respectively.
57
4.9 There is no authentic data on the manufacture and use of
biopesticides (both botanical origin pesticides and microbial control
agents). However, their consumtion and use has increased based on
the fact that a large number of registrants have got registration to
commercially manufacture these products for marketing. The research
on biopesticides have generated formulation technologies along with
potent strains of the biological organisms by ICAR institutes and State
Agricultural Universities and licensed to many commercial organizations.
These licenses have taken up commercial production after getting
registration with Registration Committee of Central Insecticide Board.
These products have been in use in IPM of pests (insects, and diseases).
Integrated Pest Management has been the policy of the Government

to stimulate judicious and need-bases use of chemical pesticides as
well as those of biological origin such as botanical pesticides (neem-
bases and plant origin pesticide formulations, microbial preparations
such as that of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). The tool box of IPM lays
emphasis on pest management through a combination of agronomic,
chemical and biological methods. Timely sowing, use of tolerant and
resistant plant varieties, transgenic pest resistant crop, biocontrol
agents, and need-based application of chemical pesticides are the
basic tools of IPM tool box. A number of novel pesticide chemistries
that have low impact to agro-ecologies and natural habitats and also
requiring small dosage per unit farm land have revolutionized the
pesticide application in crops in a large measure. The general trend in
the reduction of pesticed use is due to low dosage pesticide chemistries,
particularly in the class of herbicides and insecticides that have been
now regeistered for manufacture and use in the country.
4.10 Pesticide contamination and their residues in food commodities

and feed have been a major concern in consumers in recent times.
While the IPM ensure the safe and judicious use of pesticides in
agriculture, the effort to practice Good Agriculture Practice (GAP)
With the visualization of higher care to avoid pesticide contamination
in food and feed is being propagated to farmers. Used container
management, management of pesticide applicatiors and makin farmers
and farm labourers aware of the benefits GAP and other aspects are
the ways in which risk due to pesticide contamination in food and feed
can be reduced. IPM measures also reduce the pesticide contamination
in food due to reduced pesticide use. The data generated over the last
four years indicate that on national scale, the contamination varies
between 1.7% to 2.2%. Violations under Prevention of Food Adulteration
limit of maximum residues in commodities were also quite low. Over
sixty thousand samples have been analysed so far under this project.
58
The Plant Protection Division of Department of Agriculture and
Co-operation funds this project and ICAR is operating it in 21 laboratories
across various Government departments. The recent upsurge in
sapsucking pests across crops has increased the insecticide consumption
in many crops. Indian agriculture has been challenged due to shotfall
of labour force during peak seasonal operation. However, the
enviromental contamination of chemical pesticides could be reduced
by making the farmers and researchers aware, about timely, safe and
proper application of pesticides.
4.11 On the query of the Committee regarding effect of unscientific

use of pesticides on human health, the Department of Health Research
“Excessive/unscientific use of pesticides has caused tremendous

harm to the environment as well affects human population
indirectly. Pesticides caused various deteriorating health hazards
in animals as well as human beings. The Department have mentioned
about following effects on human health due to pesticides:—
1. Organochlorines: Acute ingestion of organochlorine

insecticides can cause a loss of sensation around the mouth,
hypersensitivity to light, sound, and touch, dizziness, tremors,
nausea, vomiting, nervousness, and confusion. Lindane can
cause breast cancer and acts as nerve poison. It also affects
the reproductive system and is known as carcinogen. DDT
(Dichloro diphenyl trichloro ethane) a common insecticide,
affects the nervous system and could act as a carcinogen.
2. Organophosphates and Carbamates: Acute organophosphate
and carbamate exposure causes signs and symptoms of excess
acetylcholine, such as increased salivation and perspiration,
narrowing of the pupils, nausea, diarrhea, decrease in blood
pressure, muscle weakness, and fatigue.
3. Pyrethroids: Pyrethroids can cause hyper-excitation,
aggressiveness, disturbed coordination, whole-body tremors,
and seizures. They can cause an allergic skin response, and
some pyrethroids may cause cancer, reproductive or
developmental effects, or endocrine system effects.”
Pesticides Residue in Food Products
4.12 Pesticides residue in crops/vegetables/fruits pose danger to

human health. There is possibility of entry of pesticides in food chain
posing the danger of biomognification. When asked about any study
59
conducted to assess pesticide residue content in agricultural produce
available in the market and being used by Restaurant/Hotels, the
Department submitted that the Department of Agriculture, Cooperation
and Farmers Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare initiated
the central sector scheme, Monitoring of Pesticide Residues at National
Level (MPRNL) during 2005-06 to evaluate the status of pesticide residues
in food commodities at national level with the participation of various
laboratories across the country. Under the scheme, participating
laboratories collect and analyse the samples of vegetables (cabbage,
cauliflower, brinjal, tomato, okra, capsicum, cucumber, bitter gourd,
green peas, beans, green chilli and coriander leaves), fruits (apple,
banana, guava, grapes, pomegranate, mangoes, oranges and pineapple),
spices (cardamom, cumin, pepper, fennel and coriander seeds), red
chilli powder, curry leaves, rice, wheat, pulses, fish/marine, meat and
egg, tea, milk and surface water the various markets such as retail
outlets and Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (APMC) markets,
farm gate and organic outlets located at different parts of the country
and analysed for the possible presence of groups of pesticide residues
such as organo-chlorine, organo-phosphorous, synthetic pyrethroids,
carbamates, herbicides.The Department further stated that 25
laboratories, which are NABL accredited as per ISO: IEC-17025: 2005,
are collecting food commodities samples and analysed for the presence
of pesticide residues:—
1. Dept. of Entomology, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana,

Punjab
2. Project Coordinating Cell, All India Network Project on
Pesticide Residues, LBS Building, Indian Agricultural Research
Institute, New Delhi
3. ICAR Unit No.-9, BTRS Building, Anand Agricultural University,
Anand
4. Dept. of Entomology, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth,
Rahuri, Maharashtra
5. Dept. of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Kerala
Agricultural University, Vellayani, Kerala
6. Division of Soil Sci. & Agril. Chemistry, Indian Institute of
Horticulture Research, Hessaraghatta Lake Post, Bangalore,
Karnataka
7. Dept. of Entomology, Rajasthan Agricultural University,
Research Station, Durgapura, Jaipur
60
8. Professor Jayashankar Telangana State Agricultural University,
E.E.I. Premises, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh
9. Dept. of Agricultural Entomology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural

University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu
10. Institute of Pesticide Formulation Technology, Sector–20,

Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon, Haryana
11. National Institute of Occupational Health, P. B. No. 2031,

Meghani Nagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
12. Western Region Referral Laboratory, Department of Veterinary

Public Health, Bombay Veterinary College, Parel, Mumbai,
Maharashtra
13. MPEDA, MPEDA House, Panampilly Avenue, Kochi , Kerala
14. Pesticide Toxicology Laboratory, Indian Institute of Toxicology

Research, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Lucknow, Utter Pradesh
15. Trace Organic Laboratory, Central Pollution Control Board,

Parivesh Bhawan, East Arjun Nagar, Delhi
16. National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, Nehru

Marg, Nagpur, Maharashtra
17. Regional Plant Quarantine Station, Haji Bunder Road, Sewri,

Mumbai, Maharashtra
18. Regional Plant Quarantine Station, G.S.T. Road,

Meenambakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
19. AINP on Pesticide Residues, Directorate of Research, Research

Complex Building, Kalyani, Nadia, West Bengal
20. Dept. of Entomology, Dr. Y.S.P. Univ. of Horticulture & Forestry,

Nauni, Solan, Himachal Pradesh
21. National Plant Quarantine Station, New Delhi
22. National Institute of Plant Health Management (NIPHM),

Pesticide Management Division, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad
23. Central Agriculture Research Institute (CARI), Port Blair,

Andaman and Nicobar
24. Export Inspection Agency, Kolkata
25. Export Inspection Agency, Mumbai
61
4.13 The Department also furnished following status of pesticide
residues in food commodities during 2008-15:—
Year Number of samples Number of samples

analysed above MRL
2008-09 13348 183 (1.4%)

2009-10 14225 147 (1.0%)
2010-11 15321 154 (1.0%)
2011-12 16948 270 (1.6%)
2012-13 16494 403 (2.4%)
2013-14 16660 458 (2.7%)
2014-15 20618 543 (2.6%)
4.14 The Department also furnished following status of pesticide

residues in Pesticide monitoring data of Fruits and Vegetables of India:—
Year Samples analysed Above MRL
2008-09 6031 137 (2.3%)

2009-10 6353 102 (1.6%)
2010-11 7232 140 (1.8%)
2011-12 8611 220 (2.5%)
2012-13 9601 255 (2.6%)
2013-14 9772 260 (2.7%)
2014-15 12832 346 (2.7%)
4.15 When asked about study conducted by the Department of

Health Research regarding average dietary intake of pesticides residues
per person, the Department submitted as under:—
“ICMR’s NIN had conducted Total Diet Studies, wherein pesticide

residues were also analysed as one of the contaminants in the
selected foods. This study was submitted to FSSAI/MoHFW for
establishing the MRLs of these pesticides.”
4.16 On the query of the Committee regarding Bureau of Indian

Standards or Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has
set any standard set for maximum pesticides residues in food products
available for sale in the Indian market by the BIS or FSSAI, the
“The FSSAI has already set the Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) in
food products. (Annexure V)”
62
4.17 On the query of the Committee regarding agency responsible
for ensuring compliance to WHO/FSSAI standards for pesticide residue
in food products in the Country, the Department of Agricultural
Education and Reseasrch stated as under:
“The DAC & FW, Min. of Agriculture and Food Safety and Standards
Authority of India (Ministry of Health and Family Welfare) are
responsible for ensuring compliance to WHO/FSSAI standards for
pesticide residue in food products in the Country.”
Study/Research on impact of Pesticides on Human Health
4.18 When asked to submit the details of research done by ICMR/

DHR on the issue of impact of chemical fertilizers and pesticides on
human health, the Department stated as under:—
“ICMR, an autonomous organization under DHR has been conducting

research through its Institutes like National Institute of Occupational
Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad, National Institute of Nutrition (NIN),
Hyderabad and National Institute for malaria research. NIOH
conducted several studies related to pesticides and human health
since 1977. Few important studies are as follows:—
Monitoring of Pesticide Residues at National Level—Central Sector
Scheme, ICAR—Ongoing—Acute Neurological Syndrome among
children, Muzaffarpur, Bihar (2013-15) [estimation of pesticides—
21 pesticides in water, and foodgrains]. The work on acute
encephalitis syndrome with respect to pesticides relationship is in
progress at Malda, Bengal (2015 onwards)—Environmental & bio-
monitoring of women workers exposed to pesticides in tea
plantation—(ROHC–B)—Ongoing—Poison Information Centre—Service
to the public with acute pesticide poisoning—
- Episodes of Endosulfan Poisoning in Jabalpur, M.P.
- Environmental Impact Assessment Study Near UCIL, Bhopal due to
Allegedly improper disposal of Waste (Directed by Hon’ble Health
Minister)
- Pesticides exposure among chili cultivators in Gujarat
- Health hazards in pesticides formulators
- Unusual illness allegedly produced by Endosulfan exposure, Kerala-
NHRC
- Health monitoring of workers manufacturing and formulating
organophosphate insecticides
- Cardiovascular toxicity among methomyl exposed workers
- Immunological profile in workers exposed to pesticides
63
4.19 When asked about plans to undertake research on the
correlation between improper use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides
on the health of the masses, the Department of Health Research
“ICMR has prepared a multi-centric study entitled “A Multi-centric

study to assess the Health Effects of Pesticides on General
Population”. The main objectives of this study is to assess the
health status of the population in areas with high and low pesticide
usage in 5 selected States — UP, Punjab, Haryana, Maharashtra,
Andhra Pradesh and estimation of the levels of pesticide residues
and their metabolites in blood and urine samples. This study will
cover ~150,000 individuals and 2% of the samples will be analysed
for pesticide residues and their metabolites.”
Presence of Pesticides in Human Blood Samples
4.20 On the query of the Committee regarding study made by

Department of Health Research/ICMR regarding presence of pesticides
in human blood samples, the Department submitted as under:—
“A series of research studies carried out by NIOH related to pesticide

residues in blood samples. A brief summary of 22 such studies is
presented at Annexure VI. NIN has also completed a study on
“Genotoxicological Effects of the Pesticides in the Farming
community in Guntur District”. As one of the objectives, pesticide
residues were also analysed so as to assess the correlation with
gentotoxicological parameters. [Genotoxicity in agricultural farmers
from Guntur district of South India—A case study—P R Jonnalagadda
et al. Human and Experimental Toxicology 31(7) 741–747 2012].”
4.21 Northern States especially Punjab and Haryana have been

pioneer States to benefit from Green Revolution. However, these States
have also faced many harmful effects associated with excessive use of
chemical fertilizers and pesticides. When asked about research done
by Centre for Science and Environment in Punjab, wherein, they have
found high level of pesticides in blood samples of local population,
The Department of Health Research submitted as under:—
“A study entitled ‘Analysis of Pesticide Residues in Blood Samples

from Villages of Punjab’ was carried out by Centre for Science and
Environment. Only twenty blood samples were selected randomly
from 4 different villages of Punjab - Mahi Nangal, Jajjal and Balloh
in Bhatinda district and Dher in Ropar district — and 14 organochlorines
and 14 organophosphorus pesticides were analyzed. This study found
64
pesticide residues in all the samples. The study mentions that each
person is exposed to and carries a body burden of multiple pesticides
which might be due to a combination of direct and indirect exposure
to these pesticides. Major contribution to total pesticide
concentration in blood samples from Punjab is of organo-phosphorus
pesticides. This could be due to the fact that Punjab is primarily
a agricultural State with one of the highest pesticide usage and
the samples were taken from the farming community members
wherein some exposure to pesticides is expected. However the
study did not attempt to correlate the presence of pesticide to
any observed health effects.”
Effects of Improper use of Chemical Fertilizers, Pesticides and other

Potential Pollutants on Occupational Groups
4.22 On the query of the Committee regarding provisions made by

Department of Health Research (DHR) for conducting research on effects
of improper use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides and other potential
pollutants on occupational groups such as farmers/factory workers,
“DHR through ICMR has an institute National Institute of

Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad which is dedicated to the
study of health effects in occupational groups including the farmers
and factory workers as well as the unorganized workers including
small scale workers like gem polishers, slate workers, stone
quarrying etc. NIOH has conducted studies on farmers/industrial
workers [Brief summary findings are in (Annexure VI)]”
“Environmental & bio-monitoring of women workers exposed to

pesticides in tea plantation — (ROHC–B) — Ongoing”
“Health hazards in pesticides formulators”
“Health monitoring of workers manufacturing and formulating

organophosphate insecticides.”
4.23 While elaborating on the focus and difficulties being faced

while sponsoring studies related to assement of impact of fertilizer
and pesticides on human health, the reprsentative of Department of
Health Research stated as under:—
‘....There has been limited research in India on the long term

effects of pesticides. From the side of the Agriculture Department,
they look at pesticides residues in food, in water etc. They do not
65
look at the human health. fl ◊ÊŸ‚ ∑§ SflÊSâÿ ∑§Ù Ÿ„UË¥ ŒπÃ „Ò¥U, ∑§fl‹ ∑˝§ÊÚ¬
•ÊÒ⁄U ©U‚∑§Ë ⁄‘U¡Ë«KÍ«U, »˝Í§≈U •ÊÒ⁄U flÒ¡Ë≈U’‹ ⁄‘U¡Ë«KÍ¡ ∑§Ë Ã⁄U„U ŒπÃ „Ò¥U– We assess the
exposure by asking the people. But they are not able to correlate
what is the level of pesticide in the environment, in the body and
on the health? Many of these have health effects in the long term
specially on the endocrine system, reproductive system and cancer
etc. ÿ„U ’„ÈUÃ ‚Ê‹ ∑§ ∞Ä‚¬Ù¡⁄U ∑§ ’ÊŒ „UË ∞‚Ë ¬˝ÊÚé‹ê‚ „UÙÃË „Ò¥U– ∞∑§-ŒÙ ‚Ê‹ ∑§Ë
S≈U«UË ◊¥ ßŸ∑§Ù ¬ÃÊ ∑§⁄UŸÊ ÕÙ«∏UÊ ◊ÈÁ‡∑§‹ „ÒU– •Êß¸‚Ë∞◊•Ê⁄U ∑§Ë ∞∑§ Ÿß¸ ß¢S≈UË≈KÍ≈U ’ŸË
„ÒU, National Institute of Research on Environmental Health in Bhopal
and the other one is the National Institute of Occupational Health,
Ahmedabad ÿ„U fl·¸ wÆvv ◊¥ ’ŸË „ÒU– The proposal is to work along with
the Ministry of Agriculture and undertake a study on effect of
pesticides on health, the way that you were mentioning, it can be
done in different parts of the country also. But it will require a
good funding in order to do a good research study. My major
limitation now is the amount of funding that is available to the
ICMR. ∑§Ê⁄U‚ªÙ«U ∞¢«UÙ‚‹»§ÊŸ ∑§Ê S≈U«UË ©Uã„UÙ¥Ÿ „UË Á∑§ÿÊ ÕÊ– ÷Ù¬Ê‹ ∑§ ß¢S≈UË≈KÍ≈U ◊¥
„U◊ ß‚ ◊Èg ∑§Ù ‹ ¡Ê ‚∑§Ã „Ò¥U– Indian population is going to suffer when
we reduce the amount of research that we are doing on these
important topic. So many good research projects we have put on
hold. ◊Ò¥ Á‚»¸§ ÿ„U ∑§„UŸÊ øÊ„UÃË „Í¢U Á∑§ •Êß¸‚Ë∞◊•Ê⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U «UË∞ø•Ê⁄U ∑§Ê ’¡≈U „U⁄U ‚Ê‹
ÉÊ≈UÃÊ ¡Ê ⁄U„UÊ „ÒU– «UÊÚ. œÊ‹ËflÊ‹ Ÿ ’„ÈUÃ ’«∏UÊ ¬˝¬Ù¡‹ ÃÒÿÊ⁄U Á∑§ÿÊ „ÒU– It is already
very small. We have a Budget of only Rs. 500 crore per annum.
Even that has been further cut. „U◊Ÿ Á¬¿U‹ „UçÃ ¬˝œÊŸ◊¢òÊË ¡Ë ∑§ ‚ÊÕ ∞∑§
’Ò∆U∑§ ∑§Ë ÕË, ©U‚◊¥ ÿ„U ⁄‘U¡ Á∑§ÿÊ ÕÊ Á∑§ flÒôÊÊÁŸ∑§ Á«U¬Ê≈¸U◊¥≈U˜‚ ∑§Ë ’¡≈U ÉÊ≈UÃË ¡Ê ⁄U„UË
„ÒU– We are ready to undertake this type of study. It is a high priority
for our country. We can look at chemical, fertilizers and also bio-
pesticides, organic fertilizers and we can launch a study in different
parts of the country to see the long term effects by working along
side with the Ministry of Agriculture. •Ê¬ ‹Ùª ‚¢‚Œ ◊¥ ÷Ë ß‚ ¬⁄U ÁfløÊ⁄U
∑§⁄U ‚∑§Ã „Ò¥U–...’
4.24 When asked about ways by which harmful impact of chemical
fertilizers and pesticides on human health can be reduced/contained,
the Department of Health Research submitted as under:—
“The harmful effects can be avoided by following Good Agricultural

Practices, for the respective pesticides and fertilizers. These GAP
are widely publicized by the Ministry of Agriculture. These include
the following:
• Proper of use of PPEs

66
• Increasing awareness among the users for scientific/proper
handling and mixing of pesticides
• Imparting knowledge about the toxicity of their improper
use
• Increasing awareness about the use of recommended quantity
and frequency of pesticides to control the pest and informing
about the dangers of exceeding these values.
• Encouraging use of bio-pesticides.”
Use of DDT in Agriculture
4.25 When the Committee pointed out that DDT which is banned
for use in agriculture is being frequently sold and used by farmers in
Mizoram, the representative of Department of Health research
responded as under:—
“......One of the issues that was raised was that even though DDT
is banned yet it is still being used. It is banned for all other things
including endosulfan that has been banned by the Supreme Court
all over the country. It is legally not permitted. All the pesticides
that were available were given permission to be exported. Ideally
speaking, there should be no stores of endosulfan within the country.
But we are not the enforcing authority. So, we do not know whether
it is actually so or not. DDT is primarily used for vector control.
It is banned for all other agricultural uses. But since it is being
produced, there is some pilferage and some people who siphon off
the DDT and use it for agricultural use, that is again an
implementation issue on which we cannot say. They are also looking
at the alternatives which are available. But the DDT is the most
cost effective pesticide as of now. Again the National Vector Control
Programme of the Ministry of Health would be the best person to
respond as to whether or after how many years we can phase out
the DDT totally from the country. Most of the other
recommendations were for better pesticides and better seed which
primarily is with the Ministry of Agriculture....”
Insecticide Act 1968
4.26 The Committee observed that as per Central Insecticides Act,

1968, objectives of Central Insecticides Board includes to furnish advice
to the Central/State Government on the risk to human beings and
animals involved in the use of insecticides and safety measures necessary
to prevent such risks. On the query of the Committee regarding
67
research/study conducted by the Central Insecticides Board before
recommending any insecticides for use in Agriculture, the Department
of Agriculture, Cooperation & farmers Welfare submitted as under:—
“The insecticides are regulated under the Insecticides Act, 1968

and the Insecticides Rules, 1971 framed there under. The Act
regulates import, manufacture, sale, transport, distribution and
use of insecticides with a view to prevent risk to human beings or
animals, and matter connected therewith. Section 4 of the
Insecticides Act, 1968 provides for constitution of the Central
Insecticides Board (CIB) to advise the Central Government and State
Governments on technical matters arising out of the administration
of this Act and to carry out other functions assigned to the Board
by or under this Act. The Central Insecticides Board does not conduct
any research/study, per-se. However, based on national and
international literature/information available, it advises Government
on the issue related to risk to human beings and animals involved
in the use of insecticides and safety measures necessary to prevent
such risks. For registration of a pesticide, the applicant is required
to submit studies on the following four parameters: (i) Chemistry
(ii) Bio-efficacy (iii) Toxicity and (iv) Packaging. The bio-efficacy
studies are required to be conducted from State Agriculture
Universities or ICAR Institutes. Thereafter, the Registration
Committee constituted under section 5 of the Insecticides Act,
1968, registers insecticides after scrutinizing formulae, verifying
claim of efficacy and safety to human beings and animals, specifying
the precautions against poisoning and any other functions. The
Committee has evolved exhaustive guidelines/data requirements
for this purpose. The Registration Committee may refuse
registration of pesticide whenever issues pertaining to safety have
not been satisfactorily adhered to. In the past, the Registration
Committee has refused registration of 18 Pesticides/Insecticides.
(Annexure-VII).”
4.27 When asked about provision for periodic evaluation of impact

of insecticides on human and animal health in the Insecticides Act,
1968, the Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare
stated as under:—
“There is no specific provision for periodic scientific evaluation of

impact of insecticides on human and animal health in the
Insecticides Act, 1968. However, as and when the information about
toxic effect of any insecticides or the information that particular
insecticide is banned/severely restricted in other countries comes
68
to the notice of the Government, such insecticides get reviewed
by Expert Committees constituted from time to time. On the basis
of the recommendations of such Review Committees, the
Government has banned 34 insecticides/insecticides formulations,
withdrawn 7 insecticides and restricted 13 insecticides for use in
the country (Annexure VIII & IX). In view of the European Food
safety Authority report about posing risk by use of Neonictinoid
pesticides on bees, Government has constituted a Committee of
Experts on 8th July, 2013 under the chairmanship of Dr. Anupam
Verma, Adjunct Professor (Retd.), Indian Agriculture Research
Institute, Pusa, New Delhi to review the use of 6 Neonictinoid
pesticides registered in India. Further, in the wake of the tragic
incident in Bihar where 23 school children died after eating mid-
day meal allegedly contaminated with monocrotophos, this
Department vide its order dated 19th August, 2013 entrusted this
Expert Committee to also review 66 pesticides which are currently
banned/restricted/withdrawn in other countries but continue to
be registered for domestic use in India.”
“This Expert Committee has already completed its review of

Neonictinoid pesticides and recommended continuance of their use
in India till robust scientific data on adverse effect on honey bees
is brought to light. The Committee has also recommended further
scientific studies for assessment of risks to honey bees; and display
of cautionary statements like ‘Do not spray during flowering of the
crop’ on formulations for foliar sprays, and “Use with care to avoid
air/dust contamination of the cropping area” for seed treatments
and soil application formulations on labels and leaflets of
Neonictinoid pesticides. The Department has accepted the Expert
Committee recommendations. The report of Committee of Experts
on review of 66 pesticides is at final stage and is likely to be
submitted to this Department shortly. A view will be taken on
continued use or banning of these 66 pesticides on the basis of the
report. Section 27 of the Insecticides Act, 1968 also provides
prohibition of sale etc. of insecticides for reasons of public safety
and section 28 provides for notification of cancellation of
registration etc.”
4.28 On the query of the Committee regarding pesticides banned

for agricultural use based upon periodic scientific evaluation, the
Department Agriculture & Farmers Welfare submitted as under:—
“Based on the recommendations of the Expert Committees

constituted from time to time for reviewing use of insecticides, this
69
Department has banned 32 insecticides/insecticides formulations
for import, manufacture and use in the country. Further,
2 insecticides/insecticides formulations were banned for use in the
country but their manufacture is allowed for export and 7 insecticides
were also withdrawn for use (Annexure-VIII). 13 pesticides were
restricted for use in the country. (Annexure-IX).”
4.29 When asked about the role of ICAR/Department of Agriculture

Research and Education under Insecticides Act, 1968, the Department
stated that use of pesticides in Agriculture is regulated under the
Insecticide Act, 1968. Pesticides used in Agriculture have to be registered
under the Act by CIBRC under the Ministry of Agriculture. ICAR offers
its comments on bio efficacy, one of the essential requirements for its
registration. Comments and approval are also given based on degradation
of the pesticides to levels below detection at the recommended doses
and duration of crops. These practices when followed do not adversely
affect the soil and human health and productivity.
4.30 During the evidence, the representatitive of Department of

Chemical and petrochemical have brought the attention of the
Committee regarding issues in administration of Insecticides Act, 1968.
On this issue, the representative of the Department stated as under:—
“.....The second set of issues I would like to raise is with regard

to the administration of the pesticides in India. As hon. Member
has said, there is a terrible confusion in the administration of the
pesticides in India. The Pesticides Act was enacted by Parliament
in 1968. That was when the Green Revolution was at its peak. The
Green Revolution was nothing except three things they were
promoting. The first one was to use the quality seeds. The second
one was to use the fertilisers, which were basically the NPK and
not the micro-nutrients. The third one was to use flood irrigation
which is also very dangerous to the plants. With these three things
at that time, the Green Revolution achieved good results. That is
not the actual agriculture; that is only a very primitive way of
looking at the agriculture. The next stage was to go to what it is,
how it is being done in Israel, Australia and western countries. The
country was never focused on that. Till today, the Agriculture
Department, I am sorry to say, has been only promoting it. I have
been a part of the Agriculture Department. I have been Agriculture
Production Commissioner, been Agriculture Commissioner and
Secretary (Environment) also. So, I am little personally conversant
with the whole gamut of issues. At that time, the Act was
administered by the Ministry of Agriculture. In the due course,
70
when different aspects of agriculture have got specialised and
have got diversified, the Act still continues to be administered by
the Department of Agriculture whereas the production of the
agrochemicals lies with the Department of Chemicals and Fertilisers.
Now, there is a dichotomy. ...”
4.31 When asked about the nature of conflict in Administration of

Insecticides Act, the representative of Department of Chemical and
Petrochemical stated as under:—
“...The user department is the Agriculture Department. As of today,

the regulatory authority of the product is also with the Agriculture
Department. Normally, in the administration, there is a clash of
interest. My view is that it should not be with the user department.
Normally, it is not, but somehow historically, it has continued with
them. I believe that there is a problem there. First, we need to
integrate the administration. It would not be appropriate for me
to tell that it should be brought to the Chemicals Department, but
I can only say that there is a very significant and immediate need
to integrate the administration of the insecticides. Since the
Government has already created the Department of Chemicals and
Fertilisers and the mandate is production, I believe that it naturally
lies with the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilisers....”
4.32 While drawing attention of the Committee regarding need of

revision of Insecticides Act, 1968, representative of the Department of
Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare on the issue, stated as
under:—
“... •Ê¬Ÿ ¬Í¿UÊ „ÒU Á∑§ „U◊ ß‚∑§ Á‹∞ ÄÿÊ ∑§⁄U ‚∑§Ã „Ò¥U– „U◊Ê⁄UÊ ßŸ‚Ä≈UË‚Êß«U˜‚
∞Ä≈U fl·¸ v~{| ∑§Ê „ÒU– fl·¸ wÆÆ} ◊¥ „U◊Ÿ ∞∑§ ŸÿÊ Áflœÿ∑§ ¬˝SÃÈÃ Á∑§ÿÊ ÕÊ, ¡Ù
©U‚ ‚◊ÿ ∑§Ë ∑Î§Á· ‚¢’¢œË SÕÊÿË ‚Á◊ÁÃ ∑§ ¬Ê‚ ÁfløÊ⁄U ∑§ Á‹∞ •ÊÿÊ ÕÊ– ‚Á◊ÁÃ
mÊ⁄UÊ •¬ŸË •ŸÈ‡Ê¢‚Ê ÁŒ∞ ¡ÊŸ ∑§ ’ÊŒ ‚ fl„U Áflœÿ∑§ ‚ŒŸ ◊¥ ÁfløÊ⁄UÊœËŸ „ÒU– „U◊
•Ê¡ •¬Ÿ ∑§Ù ß‚ ÁSÕÁÃ ◊¥ ¬ÊÃ „Ò¥U Á∑§ „U◊ •¬Ÿ •Áœ∑§ÊÁ⁄UÿÙ¥ ∑§Ù ß¢‚¬Ä≈U‚¸ ∑§Ë
¬Êfl‚¸ Œ ‚∑§Ã „Ò¥U, ‹Á∑§Ÿ „U◊ ©U‚ ∑§ÊŸÍŸ ∑§ Ã„UÃ ÿ„U ¬Êfl⁄U Ÿ„UË¥ Œ ‚∑§Ã „Ò¥U Á∑§
∑§Ù≈¸U ◊¥ ¡Ê∑§⁄U ∑§‚ ŒÊÁπ‹ ∑§⁄‘¥U– ÿ„U •Áœ∑§Ê⁄U Á‚»¸§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄UÙ¥ ∑§ ¬Ê‚ „ÒU– ⁄UÊÖÿ
‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄UÙ¥, ¡Ù ÷Ë fl¡„U „UÙ, ∑§Ê◊ ∑§⁄UŸ ◊¥ Ãà¬⁄U „Ò¥U •ÊÒ⁄U ∑È§¿U∑§ Ãà¬⁄U Ÿ„UË¥ „Ò¥U– ©U‚
Ÿ∞ Áflœÿ∑§ ◊¥ „U◊Ÿ ÿ„U ¬˝ÊflœÊŸ Á∑§ÿÊ ÕÊ Á∑§ „U◊¥ ÷Ë ÿ„U •Áœ∑§Ê⁄U Á◊‹ŸÊ øÊÁ„U∞
Á∑§ „U◊Ê⁄‘U ß¢‚¬Ä≈U‚¸ «UÊÿ⁄‘UÄ≈U‹Ë ∑§‚ ŒÊÁπ‹ ∑§⁄U ‚∑¥§– ¡’ „U◊ ⁄‘U«U ∑§⁄UÃ „Ò¥U, •ÊÒ⁄U
¬ÊÃ „Ò¥U Á∑§ fl„U Ÿ◊ÍŸÊ ◊ÊŸ∑§ ∑§ Áfl¬⁄UËÃ „ÒU ÃÙ „U◊¥ ∑§Ù≈¸U ◊¥ ¡ÊŸ ∑§Ê ÷Ë •Áœ∑§Ê⁄U
„UÙŸÊ øÊÁ„U∞– fl„U Áflœÿ∑§ •ª⁄U ß‚ ’Ê⁄U ¬ÊÁ‹¸ÿÊ◊¥≈U ◊¥ ¬Ê‚ „UÙ ¡Ê∞ªÊ ÃÙ ß‚‚
„U◊¥ ∑È§¿U ÖÿÊŒÊ •Áœ∑§Ê⁄U Á◊‹¥ª Á¡Ÿ‚ „U◊ ß‚ øÈŸıÃË ∑§Ê ‚Ê◊ŸÊ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§Ë ÁSÕÁÃ
71
◊¢ ⁄U„¥Uª– ©U‚∑§Ê ‚Ê◊ŸÊ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§Ë ÁSÕÁÃ ◊¥ „U◊ ⁄U„¥Uª– ß‚ ‚◊ÿ ¡Ù •Áœ∑§Ã◊ ‚¡Ê
„ÒU ß¢‚ÁÄ≈U‚Êß«U ∞Ä≈U ◊¥, ©U‚◊¥ ŒÙ ‚Ê‹ ∑§ ∑§Ê⁄UÊflÊ‚ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÊflœÊŸ „ÒU– •ª⁄U fl„U
ŒÈ’Ê⁄UÊ ∑§⁄‘U , Ã’ ÃËŸ ‚Ê‹ ∑§Ê „ÒU– ¡Ù ŸÿÊ Áflœÿ∑§ „ÒU, ©U‚◊¥ ‡ÊÊÿŒ ¬Ê¢ø ‚Ê‹ „ÒU,
©U‚◊¥ ⁄UÊÁ‡Ê •ÊÒ⁄U ∑§Ê⁄UÊflÊ‚ •Áœ∑§ „ÒU– ◊Ò¥ •Ê¬‚ ‚„U◊Ã „Í¢U Á∑§ ÉÊÁ≈UÿÊ ∑§Ë≈UŸÊ‡Ê∑§ ‚
ÖÿÊŒÊ ◊ÈŸÊ»§Ê ∑§⁄U Á‹ÿÊ ÿÊ ŒflÊ ◊ÈŸÊÁ‚’ Ÿ„UË¥ „ÈUß¸– ß‚‚ ÿ„U „UÙ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ¡Ù
∑§Ë«∏UÊ „ÒU fl„U Á⁄UÁ¡S≈¥U‚ •¬ŸÊ ‹ÃÊ „ÒU •ÊÒ⁄U ©U‚ ∑§Ë«∏U ∑§ ™§¬⁄U ’ÊŒ ◊¥ ‚„UË
∑§Ë≈UŸÊ‡Ê∑§ ÷Ë •‚⁄U Ÿ„UË¥ ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU– „U◊ øÊ„UÃ „ÒU¢ fl„U Áflœÿ∑§ ¡ÀŒË ‚ ¬ÊÁ⁄UÃ „UÙ
ÃÙ „U◊¥ ‡ÊÁÄÃ Á◊‹ªË •ı⁄U „U◊ ßŸ∑§ ™§¬⁄U •¢∑È§‡Ê ‹ªÊŸ ∑§Ë ÁSÕÁÃ ◊¥ „UÙ¥ª–...”
Role of ICMR in Central Insecticides Board
4.33 Director General of Indian Council of Medical Research is

represented in the Central Insecticides Board. When asked about kind
of inputs provided by the DG, ICMR to the Central Insecticides Board
on toxicity and tolerance limits for pesticides residue and basis of
these inputs, the Department submitted as under:—
“The Central Insecticides Board has a detailed mechanism of review

of toxicity data of a particular molecule. These toxicity data is
generated on laboratory animals and submitted to CIB which has
a panel of experts to review. Based on the data submitted the
Expert Group recommends permitting of a particular molecule.
ICMR/NIOH serves as one of the members of this Expert Group of
CIB when the data is reviewed. Since the pesticides cannot be
used unless the Registration is completed it is not possible to
conduct human studies before the registration process is completed.
As a general scientific principle toxicity and health effects
experiments are usually conducted on laboratory animals (higher
mammals like dog and monkey also, if required) and then
extrapolated to the field and human exposure conditions.”
4.34 On the query of the Committee regarding provision for

furnishing periodic inputs by ICMR or Department of Health Research
regarding toxicity of pesticides in the light of fresh research findings
to the Central Insecticides Board, the Department submitted as under:—
“The Central Insecticides Board regularly reviews the available

literature and periodically examines the continuity of the use of a
particular pesticide. If evidence of excessive toxicity is found those
pesticides are removed from the list of permitted chemicals. As a
member of the expert group reviewing the registration and use of
pesticides, ICMR can also raise any issues which come to light to
initiate a review of a particular molecule.”
72
4.35 On the query of the Committee regarding submission of reports
to Ministry of Agriculture for banning any particular pesticides, the
representative of Department of Health research stated as under:—
“... As far as informing the Agriculture Ministry, insecticides are

being monitored by the Insecticides Board of which Ministry of
Health and the DHR is also a member. In that sense, information
is provided to that Board and finally a consensus decision is taken
by that Board whether a particular formulation should be permitted
or not. In that sense, our inputs are going through the approval
process...”
4.36 Further elaborating on the above isssue, the representative of

DHR stated as under:—
“...‚⁄U, „U◊ ß‚ øÒ∑§ ∑§⁄U ‹¥ª, ‹Á∑§Ÿ ¡Ò‚Ê fl ∑§„U ⁄U„U Õ Á∑§ ßŸ‚ÁÄ≈U‚Êß«U ’Ù«¸U
◊¥ „U◊ ÷Ë ’Ò∆UÃ „Ò¥U ÃÙ ¡’ ßŸ ’ÊÃÙ¥ ¬⁄U øøÊ¸ „UÙÃË „ÒU ÃÙ »§Ë«’Ò∑§ ÁŒÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ
„UÙªÊ– ‹Á∑§Ÿ ßŸ ‚’◊¥ ∞‚Ê „ÒU Á∑§ •Êfl⁄U ∞ ‚≈¸UŸ «UÙ¡, •ª⁄U «UÙ¡ ‚ ÖÿÊŒÊ
∞Ä‚¬Ù¡⁄U „UÙ ¡Ê∞, Ã’ ©U‚∑§ „UÊ◊¸»È§‹ ß»Ò§Ä≈U˜‚ „UÙ ¡ÊÃ „Ò¥U, ÄÿÙ¥Á∑§ ‚÷Ë ∑Ò§Á◊∑§À‚
„UÊ◊¸»È§‹ „Ò¥U– ß‚Á‹∞ ©Uã„¥U ’ÒŸ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¡Ò‚ ß¢«UÙ-‚À»§ÊŸ •ÊÒ⁄U «UË«UË≈UË ◊¥ „ÈU•Ê
ÕÊ, ¡’ ’«∏U •Ù’Áflÿ‚ „ÒUÀÕ ß»Ò§Ä≈U˜‚ „Ò¥U ÃÙ fl„U ’ÒŸ Ã∑§ ¬„È¢Uø „UË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU, ‹Á∑§Ÿ
’Ê∑§Ë ¡Ù •÷Ë ÿÍ¡ „UÙ ⁄U„UË „Ò¥U, ÿ ‚’ ª˝Á«U«U ‹ÒflÀ‚ ¬⁄U •Ê¬ Œπ¥–...”
Integrated Pest Management
4.37 Integrated Pest Management has been the policy of the

Government to stimulate judicious and need-based use of chemical
pesticides as well as those of biological origin such as botanical
pesticides (neem-based and plant origin pesticide formulations,
microbial preparations such as those from antagonistic fungi—
Trichoderma spp., bacterial formulations such as that of Bacillus
thuringiensis (Bt.). The tool box of IPM lays emphasis on pest
management through a combination of agronomic, chemical and
biological methods. Timely sowing, use of tolerant and resistant plant
varieties, transgenic pest resistant crop, biocontrol agents, and need-
based application of chemical pesticides are the basic tools of IPM tool
box. A number of novel pesticide chemistries that have low impact to
agro-ecologies and natural habitats and also requiring small dosage per
unit farm land have revolutionized the pesticide application in crops
in a large measure. The general trend in the reduction of pesticide use
is due to low dosage pesticide chemistries, particularly in the class of
herbicides and insecticides that have been now registered for
manufacture and use in the country.
73
4.38 The Department of Agricultural Research and Education have
further stated that pesticide contamination and their residues in food
commodities and feed have been a major concern in consumers in
recent times. While the IPM ensure the safe and judicious use of
pesticides in agriculture, the effort to practice Good Agriculture Practice
(GAP) with the visualization of higher care to avoid pesticide
contamination in food and feed is being propagated to farmers. Used
container management, management of pesticide applicators and
making farmers and farm labourers aware of the benefits GAP and
other aspects are the ways in which risk due to pesticide contamination
in food and feed can be reduced. IPM measures also reduce the pesticide
contamination in food due to reduced pesticide use. The data generated
over the last four years indicate that on national scale, the
contamination varies between 1.7% to 2.2%. Violations under Prevention
of Food Adulteration limit of maximum residues in commodities were
also quite low. Over sixty thousand samples have been analysed so far
under this project. The Plant Protection Division of Department of
Agriculture and Co-operation funds this project and ICAR is operating
it in 21 laboratories across various Government departments. The recent
upsurge in sapsucking pests across crops has increased the insecticide
consumption in many crops. Indian agriculture has been challenged
due to short-fall of labour force during peak seasonal operations.
However, the environmental contamination of chemical pesticides could
be reduced by making the farmers and researchers aware, about timely,
safe and proper application of pesticides.
4.39 When asked about policy of the Government of India to achieve

the objectives of Integrated Pest Management, the Department
“Government of India has adopted IPM as cardinal principle and

main plank of plant protection in the overall Crop Production
Program since 1985. To achieve the objectives of Integrated Pest
Management, the Council provided technical backstopping through
National Research Centre for Integrated Pest Management and All
India Coordinated Research Project on Biological Control.”
4.40 On being asked about efforts being made in the country to

achieve the objective as outlined in Integrated Pest Management, the
“NCIPM is validating IPM technology in various crops mainly rice,

cotton, pulses, vegetables, fruits crop, oilseed etc. NCIPM have
developed location specific forecasting models of some crops in
74
NICRA programme and ICT based e-pest surveillance system. The
Government is implementing the various scheme namely
Strengthening & Modernization of Pest Management Approach in
the country (SMPMA), Strengthening & Modernization of Plant
Quarantine Facilities in India (SMPQF) and Monitoring of Pesticide
Residues at National Level (MPRNL) to achieve the objective as
outlined in Integrated Pest Management. Besides, National Institute
of Plant Health Management (NIPHM) assists the States and the
Government of India in increasing the efficiency of the existing
pest and disease surveillance and control system, certification and
accreditation systems through a core role as a training and adaptive
research centre in the field of extension and policy developments
related to plant protection. The NIPHM provides its services to
organizations in both the public and the private sector.”

Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare stated as under:—
“... ¡„UÊ¢ Ã∑§ ∑§Ë≈UŸÊ‡Ê∑§Ù¥ ∑§Ê ‚flÊ‹ „ÒU, „U◊ ‚÷Ë ¡ÊŸÃ „Ò¥U Á∑§ ∑§Ë≈UŸÊ‡Ê∑§ ¡„U⁄U
„ÒU– ß‚∑§Ê ¬˝ÿÙª ’„ÈUÃ „UË ‚Ùø-‚◊¤Ê∑§⁄U ∑§⁄UŸÊ øÊÁ„U∞ Á¡ÃŸË ◊ÊòÊÊ ÁŒ‡ÊÊ-ÁŸŒ¸‡Ê ◊¥
Á‹πË ªÿË „ÒU, •ª⁄U ©U‚‚ ÖÿÊŒÊ ¬˝ÿÙª ∑§⁄‘¥Uª ÿÊ ∞‚Ë »§‚‹ ¬⁄U ©U¬ÿÙª ∑§⁄‘¥Uª
Á¡‚∑§ Á‹∞ fl„U „ÒU „UË Ÿ„UË¥ ÃÙ ©U‚∑§ ŸÃË¡ ’„ÈUÃ πÃ⁄UŸÊ∑§ „UÙ¥ª– ◊Ò¥ ◊ÊŸÃÊ „Í¢U
Á∑§ ß‚◊¥ „U◊Ê⁄UË •‚»§‹ÃÊ ⁄U„UË „ÒU– ∑§Ùß¸ ∑§Ë≈UŸÊ‡Ê∑§ ¡Ù Á∑§‚Ë ∞∑§ »§‚‹ ∑§ Á‹∞
ÃÒÿÊ⁄U Á∑§ÿÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU, •ŸÈ◊ÙÁŒÃ Á∑§ÿÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU, fl„U ŒÍ‚⁄UË »§‚‹Ù¥ ¬⁄U ÷Ë ©U¬ÿÙª „UÙ
⁄U„UÊ „ÒU– ©U‚∑§ ¬Á⁄UáÊÊ◊ ÉÊÊÃ∑§ „UÙ ‚∑§Ã „Ò¥U– ◊Ò¥ ◊ÊŸÃÊ „Í¢U Á∑§ ÿ„U „U◊Ê⁄UË ∑§◊Ë ⁄U„UË
„ÒU– „U◊ ß‚∑§Ê Á∑§ÃŸÊ ¬˝øÊ⁄U-¬˝‚Ê⁄U ∑§⁄U ¬Ê∞¢ ÃÊÁ∑§ Á∑§‚ÊŸ ‚„UË ◊ÊòÊÊ ◊¥ ß‚∑§Ê
©U¬ÿÙª ∑§⁄‘¥U– ◊Ò¥ ∞∑§ ©UŒÊ„U⁄UáÊ ŒÃÊ „Í¢U, ¬„U‹ ¡’ Áç‹≈U ∑§Ê ¡◊ÊŸÊ ÕÊ, „U◊ Áç‹≈U
Ã’ Ã∑§ ∑§⁄UÃ Õ ¡’ Ã∑§ fl„U ◊ë¿U⁄U ◊⁄U∑§⁄U Áª⁄U Ÿ„UË¥ ¡ÊÃÊ ÕÊ ÄÿÙ¥Á∑§ „U◊Ê⁄‘U ◊Ÿ
◊¥ ÿ„U œÊ⁄UáÊÊ ⁄U„UÃË ÕË Á∑§ ¡’ Ã∑§ „U◊Ê⁄‘U ‚Ê◊Ÿ fl„U ∑§Ë≈U ◊⁄U Ÿ ¡Ê∞ Ã’ Ã∑§
©U‚ ∑§Ë≈UŸÊ‡Ê∑§ ∑§Ê •‚⁄U Ÿ„UË¥ „ÈU•Ê „ÒU– ÿ„U œÊ⁄UáÊÊ ‹ÙªÙ¥ ◊¥ •÷Ë ÷Ë „ÒU– ß‚∑§Ë
fl¡„U ‚ ‹’‹ ¬⁄U Á‹πË „ÈUß¸ ◊ÊòÊÊ ‚ ÖÿÊŒÊ ∑§Ë≈UŸÊ‡Ê∑§ ∑§Ê ©U¬ÿÙª „UÙÃÊ „ÒU– ∑§ß¸
’Ê⁄U ÿ„U ’ÊÃ ÁŒ◊Êª ◊¥ Ÿ„UË¥ •ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ¡„U⁄U ∑§Ù •‚⁄U ∑§⁄UŸ ◊¥ ≈UÊß◊ ‹ªÃÊ „ÒU,
ß‚Á‹∞ ¡M§⁄UÃ ‚ ÖÿÊŒÊ ©U‚∑§Ê ©U¬ÿÙª „UÙÃÊ „ÒU– ¡’ ¡M§⁄UÃ ‚ ÖÿÊŒÊ ©U¬ÿÙª „UÙªÊ
ÃÙ ©U‚∑§ ¬Á⁄UáÊÊ◊ ÉÊÊÃ∑§ „UÙÃ „Ò¥U– »§‹Ù¥ •ÊÒ⁄U ‚Áé¡ÿÙ¥ ∑§Ù ¬∑§ÊŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ∑§ÊÚ¬⁄U
‚À»§≈U ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿÙª „UÙÃÊ „ÒU, ‹Á∑§Ÿ ©U‚∑§Ê ¬˝ÿÙª ∑§◊ „UÙÃÊ „ÒU– ∑§ÊÚ¬⁄U ‚À»§≈U ∑§Ê
¬˝ÿÙª ¬⁄Ufl‹ flªÒ⁄U„U ¬⁄U ø◊∑§ ‹ÊŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ∑§⁄UÃ „Ò¥U– ∑§Ê’Ê¸ß«U ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿÙª ÉÊÊÃ∑§
„ÒU Á¡‚‚ »§‹Ù¥ ∑§Ù ¬∑§ÊÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU– ∑§Ê’Ê¸ß«U ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿÙª ß‹‹Ëª‹ „ÒU, ÿ„U ŒflÊ ’ÒŸ
„ÒU– ¬∑§ÊŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ∑§fl‹ ∞ÕË‹ËŸ ∑§Ê ©U¬ÿÙª Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU– ÿ„U Áfl·ÿ »Í§«U
‚ç≈UË ∑§Ê „ÒU, ÿ„U „UÀÕ Á«U¬Ê≈¸U◊¥≈U ∑§ •¢Ãª¸Ã •ÊÃÊ „ÒU– ‹Á∑§Ÿ ∑§Ê’Ê¸ß«U ’„ÈUÃ „UË
ÉÊÊÃ∑§ øË¡ „ÒU– œË⁄‘U-œË⁄‘U „U◊Ÿ ŒÙ-ÃËŸ »§‹Ù¥ ∑§ ◊Ê◊‹ ◊¥ ∑§Ê»§Ë „UŒ Ã∑§ ‚»§‹ÃÊ
¬˝ÊåÃ ∑§Ë „ÒU– ∑§Ê’Ê¸ß«U ’„ÈUÃ •‚¸ ‚ ’ÒŸ „ÒU, ‹Á∑§Ÿ flSÃÈÁSÕÁÃ ‚ „U◊ ‚÷Ë •flªÃ
„Ò¥U– ß‚∑§Ê ¬˝ÿÙª Á∑§‚ÊŸ Ÿ„UË¥ ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU, ß‚∑§Ê ©U¬ÿÙª √ÿÊ¬Ê⁄UË ∑§⁄UÃ „Ò¥U–...”
75
Allocations for Integrated Pest Mangement
4.42 When asked about specific allocations made for achieving the
objectives of IPM, the Department submitted as under:—
“ICAR has set up National research centre for integrated pest

management for achieving the objectives of IPM and the allocation
and expenditure for five years is as follows:—
Year Allocation Expenditure (Rs. in lakhs)
2010-11 157.00 157.00

2011-12 150.00 150.00
2012-13 125.00 122.20
2013-14 131.50 131.25
2014-15 128.00 127.86
To enhance the production and productivity of crops by protecting

them from the ravages of pests, the Government of India, Ministry
of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Department of Agriculture,
Cooperation & Farmers Welfare launched a scheme ‘Strengthening
and Modernization of Pest Management Approach in India’ since
1991-92 by adopting Integrated Pest Management (IPM) as cardinal
principle and main plank of plant protection strategy in overall
crop production and protection programme. Under the ambit of
IPM programme, the Government of India established 31 Central
IPM Centres (CIPMCs) in 29 States and one UT. In 12th Five year
plan EFC Memo, a ‘National Mission on Agricultural Extension and
Technology (NMAET)’ was formed under which a sub-mission on
‘Plant Protection and Plant Quarantine’ was introduced from
2014-15. ‘Strengthening and Modernization of Pest Management
Approach in India’ has become one of the components of this
sub-mission with mandate to popularize adoption of Integrated
Pest Management (IPM) through training and demonstration in crops
inter-alia promotion of biological control approaches in crop
protection technology.
Though no specific allocations have been made for achieving the

objectives of IPM, however budget allocated for the CIPMCs for
other activities is used for IPM work also. The following activities
are being taken up by CIPMCs to profess the IPM programmes:—
1. Conducting Farmers Field Schools.
76
2. Conducting two days short duration training programmes for
the farmers.
3. Conducting five days short duration training programmes to
the State extension officers who intern enhance the
knowledge in their areas of jurisdiction.
Sl. Year Allocation Expenditure A (for E (For Grand Total Grand Total
No. for FFS (A) for FFS (E) 2-days) 2-2-days) Allocation Expenditure
1. 2011-12 1,94,64,300 1,71,82,543 47,86,400 43,40,856 2,42,50,700 2,15,23,399

2. 2012-13 1,77,82,200 1,50,80,686 50,18,000 41,62,298 2,28,00,200 1,92,42,984
3. 2013-14 1,92,27,900 1,49,42,568 44,00,400 41,17,089 2,36,28,300 1,90,59,657
4. 2014-15 96,12,000 1,20,49,824 22,00,200 18,03,088 1,18,12,200 1,38,52,912
5. 2015-16 1,00,12,500 Awaited(@) 46,70,600 Awaited(@) 1,46,83,100
@IPM—Programmes for 2015-16 still going on, expenditure for them is awaited.”
Training Programmes on Integrated Pest Management
4.43 When asked about workshops and training programmes have

been organized by ICAR Institutes on Integrated Pest Management in
the Country during the last five years, the Department submitted that
a total 15 Training Programmes have been conducted, which are as
follows:—
Trainings conducted by DPPQS, Faridabad
• Master Trainer’s Training courses (Seasons Long Trainings)

conducted on Various Agricultural/Horticultural crops 48 Nos.
• Master Trainers Trained through SLTs 1697 Nos.
• Farmers’ Field Schools organized 12931 Nos. by CIPMCs/KVKs/
SAUs.
• Agriculture/Horticulture Extension Officers Trained through
FFSs 54369 Nos.
• Farmers trained through FFSs 3,88,863 Nos.
• Persons (Pesticide dealers, NGOs, lead farmers, private
entrepreneurs etc.) trained under Human resource
Developments Programmes (2&5 days duration) on IPM skills
13730.
NCIPM had organized the following IPM training Programme:
• Year : 2013, Venue: Nagaland, for Nagaland, Manipur and

Arunachal Pradesh
77
• Year: 2013, Venue: Meghalaya, for Meghalaya, Assam, Sikkim
• Year 2013 (2 Trainings): Tripura, Tripura
• Year 2014: Venue: Bangalore, for Karnataka, Goa, Tamil Nadu
and Kerala
• Year 2014: Venue: Pondicherry, for Karnataka, Goa, Tamil
Nadu and Kerala
• Year 2014: Venue: Kanpur, for Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand
• Year 2014: Venue: Modipuram, for Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand
• Year: 2014: Venue: Delhi, for Bihar
• Year 2014: Venue: Jaipur, for Rajasthan and Gujarat
• Year 2015 (2): Venue Delhi, for Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana,
Assam, West Bengal, Odisha, Nagaland, Manipur, Punjab,
Jammu and Kashmir
• Year 2015. Venue: Jabalpur, for Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh,
Odisha and Bihar
• Year 2015: Venue: Kalyani, for West Bengal, Bihar, Odisha,
Jharkhand, Andaman and Nicobar
• Year 2015: Venue: Ludhiana, for Punjab, Haryana, Delhi,
Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir.
4.44 On the query of the Committee regarding cases of sale of

banned, spurious and expired pesticides pending before the Department
of Agriculture and Cooperation, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation
and Farmers Welfare submitted that a detail regarding the number of
cases of sale of banned, spurious and expired pesticides and action
taken by Department of Agriculture & Cooperation are at Annexure X.
4.45 On the query of the Committee regarding development of

technologies, alternative green pesticides etc. for achieving the
objectives of IPM by ICAR Institutes during the last five years, the
Department furnished the following details:—
1. “IPM technologies for cotton as well as pulses (Pigeonpea

and chickpea), wherein toxic pesticides have been replaced
with alternative pesticides based on green molecules. These
technologies have not only helped in reducing number of
sprays but also helped in limiting use of Organophosphates
as well as carbamates.
2. Cultural strategies for Zonal (North, Central & South) and
national level mealy bug (Phenacoccus solenopsis)
management.
78
3. Web enabled-weather based forewarning for insect pests viz.,
4. Sap feeders of cotton (jassids, thrips and whiteflies) for 5
locations [Nagpur (MH), Faridkot (PB), Hisar (HR), Ludhiana
(PB) and Sriganganagar (RJ)].
5. Rice yellow stem borer for five locations [Aduthurai (TN),
Chinsura (WB), Karjat (MH), Mandya (KA), Raipur (CG)] during
Kharif.
6. Rice leaf folder for Kharif season of Ludhiana (PB) and
Aduthurai (TN) and for Rabi season of Aduthurai (TN).
7. Forewarning pod borer (Helicoverpa armigera) of pigeonpea
at Gulbarga (KA).
8. Forewarning of tobacco caterpillar Spodoptera litura on
groundnut for three locations [Kadiri (AP), Dharwad (KA) and
Junagadh (GJ)].
9. Web enabled pest surveillance across crops (Rice, Pigeonpea,
Groundnut and Tomato) and locations (25 nos. covering
10 States, across 10 agro-climatic zones & 12 agro ecological
regions).
10. ICT for area wide implementation of IPM across Kharif (rice,
soybean, cotton and pigeonpea) and Rabi (chickpea) crops
in Maharashtra Light trap for managing insects leading to
reduction in use of pesticides.”
4.46 When asked about efforts are being made by the Department
to encourage research and development of developing plant/seed
varieties which can have inherent capacity to withstand pest and other
harmful plant diseases, the Department submitted as under:—
“Crop based research institutes with ICAR develop pest resistant/

tolerant varieties providing crops inherent capacity to withstand
the attack of diseases and pests.”
4.47 On the query of the Committee regarding inventory of good

farming practices promoting minimum use of pesticides in the country
made by the ICAR, the Department submitted the following details:—
1. “NCIPM has developed location specific various IPM

technologies in different crops viz. rice, cotton. Vegetables
(Okra, bell pepper chilli, bitter gourd, onion), fruit crops,
protected cultivation in which the use of pesticides is
minimized.
79
2. ICT based e-pest surveillance programme.
3. Light trap for managing insects.”
Use of Protective Gears by the Farmers during Sprinkling of Pesticides

in Fields
4.48 On the query of the Committee regarding use of protective

gears by the farmers during sprinkling of pesticides in fields and the
information/training provided to the farmers to make them aware of
ill-effects of pesticides on health of farmers, the Department submitted
as under:—
“Farmers often refrain from using protective gears that are

advocated while sprinkling the pesticides in fields. Regular trainings
on precautions taken during spray of pesticides is being given by
NCIPM and DPPQS. Through these training programs farmers are
made aware of ill effects of pesticides on health.”
80
PART II
OBSERVATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE
Use of Chemical Fertilizers and Pesticides
1. The Committee note that Green Revolution has been a boon

to solve crisis of foodgrains which our country was facing at the
time of independence. Strategy of high yielding seeds-fertilizer-
irrigation has paid rich dividend and farmers of our country were
able to enhance foodgrain production from 83 mt in 1960-61 to
around 253 mt in 2014-15. Now, our country is not only sufficient
in production of foodgrain to meet food requirements of the country
but also able to contribute towards foreign earning. However, the
Committee observe that this achievement in the field of agriculture
has also affected the environment and brought many negative impacts
associated with use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides on
agriculture and allied sectors in the country. The Committee are of
the view that there is need to examine pros and cons of strategy
of use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides to enhance food
production in order to incorporate suitable changes to conserve our
natural resources and minimize adverse effects on agriculture &
allied sectors without jeopardizing agricultural growth. The
Committee have analyzed different aspects associated with the issue
in succeeding paragraphs.
Decline in Agricultural Growth
2. The Committee note that the country will require to enhance

the foodgrains production to the level of 300 mt by 2025 to feed
its teeming millions. However, the Committee are distressed to note
that the pace of agricultural growth rate is slowly decreasing. The
Committee observe that decadal rate of growth of agriculture since
beginning of green revolution has decreased significantly from a
high of 8.37% during 1960-70 to a low of 1.44% during 1990-2000.
The rate of agriculture growth has been 2.61% during 2000-2010.
The Committee further observe that rate of agriculture growth in
important States like Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya
Pradesh, Gujarat, Bihar and Maharashtra has decreased significantly
during the last decade. The Committee also note that country failed
to achieve the agriculture growth rate of 4% which was set during
12th Plan. The Committee are of the view that strategy of over-
81
reliance on chemical fertilizers adopted during green revolution
period needs reorientation keeping in view of stagnant agricultural
growth in important States. The Committee, therefore, recommend
the Department to analyze the strategy of agricultural growth in
country and prepare a detailed plan to reinvigorate the sector in
the country.
Degradation and Erosion of Soil Fertility
3. Plants require nutrients for their growth. These nutrients

such as nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium,
sulphur copper, iron etc. are derived by plants from soil. Traditionally,
farmers used farm yard manure or animal manure to augment
declining soil productivity. However, strategy of green revolution
involved use of non-renewable inputs of phosphorus potash and
nitrates as chemical fertilizers to meet nutrient deficit of soil.
Application or use of chemical fertilizers in agriculture should be
based upon scientific assessment of soil nutrient status. However,
the Committee note that use of fertilizers in India was hardly based
upon scientific analysis of soil due to near absence of soil testing
facilities, low awareness and over reliance on Urea due to fertilizer
subsidy policy. Imbalanced and inadequate nutrient use coupled
with neglect of organic manure has caused multi nutrient deficiency
in Indian soil. The Committee note that out of total 525 Districts in
the country, about 292 Districts account for 85 percentage of total
fertilizer consumption. The Committee have further been informed
that nutrient deficiency at country level are of the order of 89, 80,
50, 41, 49, 33, 13, 12, 5 and 3% for nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium,
sulphur, zinc, boron, molybdenum, iron, manganese and copper
respectively. The continuous use of high analysis fertilizer has made
sulphur a limiting nutrient in many soils in the country. The limiting
nutrients do not allow the full expression of other nutrients, thereby,
lowering the fertilizer response and crop productivity. The Committee
have also been informed that Indian agriculture is operating with a
negative balance of plant nutrient in soil. The fertility status of
Indian soils has been declining fast under intensive agriculture as
nutrient application is not able to keep pace with their removal by
crops and soil are showing signs of fatigue especially in Indo Gangetic
plain. The inadequate and imbalanced nutrient use coupled with
neglect of organic manure has caused multi nutrient deficiency in
soil in many areas over the years. The Committee note that many
study on impact of green revolution in India has found that excessive
use of fertilizers and pesticides had led to degradation and erosion
of soil fertility, built up of toxic nutrients in soil, loss of
82
micronutrient, loss of soil microorganisms among other desirable
and undesirable effects. The micro nutrient deficiency in Indian soil
due to excessive use of nitrogen fertilizers and inadequate use of
micronutrient fertilizer has its impact on nutritional status of crop
grown in it which are devoid of essential micronutrient necessary
for human health. The studies have shown that micronutrient
deficiency in crop is causing deficiency of micronutrient such as
zinc, iron, copper etc. among Indian population leading to many
diseases and growth impairment in human and animals. Use of
nitrogenous fertilizers in agriculture is also causing eutrophication
of water bodies causing deterioration of water quality. The
Committee also note that fertilizer being used in agriculture is also
source of Nitrous oxide which is a potent green house gas. However,
the Committee are perturbed to note that the Government has not
bothered to conduct any comprehensive study/analysis on adverse
impact of use of fertilizers and pesticides on soil fertility including
on surrounding environment and heath of the masses. The
Committee, therefore, reccommend that a comprehensive study on
impact of chemical fertilizers and pesticides on agriculture and
allied sectors in the country may be undertaken by the Government
so that curative steps may be planned to address its negative impact
and fresh strategy may be formulated for rapid agriculture growth
in the country.
Balanced Use of Fertilizers
4. The Committee note that chemical fertilizers have played an

important role in increasing food grain production in country. Use
of chemical fertilizers is one of the costliest inputs which has became
a necessity in Indian agriculture Sector without which it would be
difficult to feed ever increasing population of the Country. The use
of chemical fertilizer in the country have increased from less than
1 million tonnes of total nutrients in mid sixties to 25.6 millions
tonnes in 2014-15. The country will require around 45 MT of
nutrients to achieve the foodgrain production of 300 MT by 2025 to
feed its increasing population. However, majority of 45 MT nutrients
has to be supplied through chemical fertilizers as only
6-8 MT nutrients can be supplied through existing organic sources.
The Committee also note that the pattern of use of fertilizer in the
country is not even. About 292 districts accounts for consumption
of 85 percentage of fertilizer in the country. Further, there’s
imbalance in fertilizer use in terms of NPK as it is evidenced by
their wider consumption ratio of 6.7:2.4:1 in the country as against
their desirable ratio of 4:2:1.The situation is more grim in
83
agriculturally important States like Punjab and Haryana where NPK
use ratio is as high as 31.4:8.0:1 and 27.7:6.1:1 respectively.
According to the Secretary of Department of Agriculture, Cooperation
and Farmers Welfare, skewed subsidy policy in favour of urea and
high prices of other fertilizers are the real culprit behind the
imbalanced use of fertilizers in the country. Even the pattern of use
of fertilizer varies widely among different crops. Fertilizer use in
potato, sugarcane, cotton, wheat and paddy are among highest at
the level of 347.2, 239.3, 192.6, 176.7 and 165.2 kg/hectare
respectively. Even among these crops, there is excessive use of
nitrogenous fertilizer. The Committee also observe that there’s
excessive use of urea in country. During 2014-15, 306 million tonnes
Urea was used out of total 485 million tonnes fertilizer consumption
in country. The Committee are of the view that there is an urgent
need to take steps to rationalise over usage of chemical fertilizers
in country in order to restore fertilty of soil and to check negative
effects associated with it. The Committee, therefore, reccommend
that a strategy may be worked out to promote the balanced use of
fertilizers in the country. It is also imperative that the farmers are
educated on this aspect and therefore, the Committee also
recommend that a massive awareness campaign may be launched
by the Government to educate farmers regarding balanced and
judicious use of fertilizers in the country.
Integrated Nutrient Management
5. The Committee note that Integrated Nutrient Management

(INM) adopted from Tenth Plan envisages conjunctive use of chemical
fertilizers including secondary and micronutrient, organic manure,
composts/vermin-compost, bio-fertilizers and green manures. ICAR
has generated GIS based soil fertility maps, nutrient management
packages, developed strains of Nitrogen fixer for production of quality
biofertilizers, standardized technologies for preparation of urban/
rural compost, green manuring and crop residue recycling which
can be effectively utilized by the farmers of the country to improve
soil health and augment agricultural production and productivity.
ICAR has also developed conservation technologies like fertigation,
zero tillage, bed planting, laser land levelling and leaf colour chart
to save costly fertilizers. According to ICAR, workshops and training
programmes are being organized to educate farmers on these aspects.
However, the Committee are concerned to note that objectives as
outlined in Integrated Nutrient Management could not be achieved
by the Government which is amply exemplified by imbalanced use
of fertilizers in terms of NPK, incidents of soil degradation in green
84
revolution area like Haryana and Punjab and extreme lack of
micronutrient in majority of Indian soils. The Committee also note
that lack of effective extension services to the farmers as brought
out in previous reports of the Committee is a limiting factor to
achieve the aims of Integrated Nutrient Management. The Committee
are of the view that unless a robust agriculture extension system is
established in the country with special emphasis on training of
farmers about good agricultural practices, provision of essential
agricultural inputs and dissemination of technologies, bio-fertilizers
etc. developed by agricultural institutions, it would be difficult to
secure our environment without jeopardizing agricultural
productivity. The Committee, therefore, recommend the Government
to plan an effective agricultural extension services in the entire
country. The Committee also desire that the Government may initiate
discussion on the issue with all State Governments, agricultural
research institutions, NGOs active in the field of agriculture and
experts at National and International level so that steps may be
taken to achieve the objective of Integrated Nutrient Management
well before environmental degradation reached at a point of no
return.
Fertilizer Subsidy Policy
6. The Committee note that the Government has been regulating

sale, pricing and quality of fertilizers in the country to ensure
adequate and timely availability of fertilizers at affordable price to
farmers for maximizing agricultural production in the country and
to ensure food security for the people. The difference in concession
rate/import price and net market realization is given as subsidy by
the Government to the farmers through fertilizer industry. The
subsidy regime started in the country during 1977 as Retention
Price Scheme. Subsequently, Concession Scheme for P&K Fertilizers
was introduced w.e.f. 01 April, 2008. Under the Concession Scheme,
MRP of P&K fertilizer was fixed by the Government and the difference
in the delivered price of fertilizers at the farm gate and MRP was
compensated by the Government as subsidy to the Manufacturing
Industries. This scheme was continued upto 31.03.2010. However,
to overcome the deficiency of Concession Scheme, the Government
introduced Nutrient based Subsidy (NBS) policy for N, P & K fertilizers
w.e.f. 01.04.2010. The Committee note that under NBS policy a
fixed subsidy, decided annually, is provided on each subsidized P&K
fertilizers depending upon its nutrient content such as N, P, K and
Sulphur. Under NBS, additional subsidy is provided for fertilizers
fortified with Zinc and Boron. Single Super Phosphate (SSP) has also
85
been included under scheme. NBS policy was expected to promote
innovation and broaden the basket of fertilizers and enable fertilizer
use as per soil and crop requirements. However, exclusion of Urea
from NBS and decontrol of price of P & K fertilizers has led to
imbalanced application of nitrogen vis-a-vis phosphatic and potassic
fertilizers in country. These facts have been accepted by the
representatives of the Department of Fertilizer during the evidence.
The Committee have also observed that present policy of fertilizer
subsidy also exclude liquid fertilizers, bio-fertilizers, farm organic
manure etc. which are considered more effective and environment
friendly to restore soil fertility and enhancement of agricultural
productivity. It has also been argued by the Department Agriculture,
Cooperation & Farmers Welfare that usage of fertilizers should be
left to the discretion of the farmers by direct transfer of fertilizer
subsidy to the farmers. The representative of Department of fertilizer
had also suggested to provide fertilizers to the farmers as per soil
health card. The Committee are of view that the present NBS policy
has failed to rationalize fertilizer subsidy and has led to imbalanced
use of fertilizers due to high prices of Phosphatic and Potassic
fertilizers and low price of Urea. While appreciating the recent
reduction in the prices of phosphatic and potassic fertilizers by the
Central Government, the Committee are of the view that there is
a need of fertilizer subsidy regime which can promote environment
friendly fertilizers like bio-fertilizers, organic farm manure or liquid
fertilizer which are more effective than granules. The Committee,
therefore, recommend that existing fertilizer subsidy policy may be
revised and the revised policy which is more appropriate for Indian
conditions and favour sustainable growth of agriculture sector may
be formulated. Further, there is a need to encourage the organic
farming considering its long term benefits. The ways of encouraging
the organic farming should also be explored while revising the
existing Fertilizer Subsidy Policy.
Constitution of Regulatory Authority for Fertilizer Sector
7. Availability of good quality fertilizers is one of the major

responsibility of Central and State Governments by which they can
help the farmers of the country to enhance their production and
income. However, sometimes production and sale of inferior quality
of fertilizers in the market badly affect agricultural production,
which in turn affect already burdened farmers. Therefore, robust
registration process of fertilizers and regular check are ways to
ensure that only qualitative fertilizers are produced and sold in the
market. The Committee note that Central Government has
86
constituted a Central Fertilizer Committee (CFC) under Fertilizer
Control Order (FCO), 1957 for analysis and recommendation of new
fertilizer for inclusion in the FCO. CFC constituted a technical group
consisting of a Chairman from ICAR and other members/scientists/
experts from the field of agriculture. The Committee also note that
before inclusion of any new fertilizer in the FCO, this technical
group examines the agronomic aspects, specifications and field trials
reports of new fertilizer. Agronomic field trials are required to be
conducted by the Company in minimum two cropping seasons under
the aegis of a State Agricultural University or any other Institutes
of ICAR. Recommendation for inclusion of new fertilizer in FCO is
done by CFC only on the basis of further examination of technical
group report/recommendations. The Committee are of the view
that present system of certification of new fertilizer is cumbersome,
time consuming and bureaucratic. Further, field trials of new
fertilizer without involvement of technical group or CFC leaves scope
for manipulation of results of field trials. Thus, there is a need to
streamline the existing process and constitution of a Fertilizer
Development and Regulating Authority will help to streamline the
process, certification of fertilizers, continuous quality check,
imposing penalty for sub standard and spurious quality of fertilizers,
promoting innovations in fertilizer sector and fixation of pricing of
fertilizers etc. The Committee, therefore, recommend the
Government to take required steps for Constitution of a regulatory
authority for fertilizer sector.
Incentives for usage of Bio-Fertilizers
8. The Committee note that bio-fertilizers do not contain any

chemicals which are harmful to the living soil and are extremely
advantageous in enriching soil fertility. Bio-fertilizers such as
Rhizobium, Azotobactor, Blue Green Algae etc. are eco friendly
organic agro inputs. Bio-fertilizers fulfil plant requirements by
supplying organic nutrients through microorganism and their
byproducts. During 2014-15, 80696.45 MT carrier based and 4054.56
KL liquid based bio-fertilizers were used in the country. The
Committee also observe that use of bio-fertilizers is more in western
and southern parts of country, whereas, eastern and northern States
are lagging behind in use of bio-fertilizers. The Government is
providing financial assistance @25% of total financial outlays subject
to ceiling of Rs. 40 lakhs to individuals and private agencies for
biofertlizers units. Financial assistance is also being provided to the
State Governments/Government agencies to set up input production
unit and bio-fertilizer/bio-pesticide units and bio-fertilizer and
87
organic fertilizer quality control laboratories under Pradhan Mantri
Krishi Vikash Yojna and National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture.
The Committee note that 50 bio-fertilizer units have been established
under the scheme with production capacity of 12563 tons as on
March, 2014. However, the Committee are distressed to note that
there is no provision to provide any kind of direct incentives/subsidy
on bio-fertilizers to the farmers to promote its widespread use in
country. The Committee are of considered view that there is an
urgent need to devise policy to promote use of green alternatives
such as bio-fertilizers in order to minimize harmful impact of
chemical fertilizers on environment and human health. The
Committee, therefore, recommend that the Government may explore
possibilities to provide direct incentives to the farmers for use of
biofertilizers across the country. The Committee also desire that a
strategy may be worked out to encourage entrepreneurs for
establishment of units for production of bio-fertilizers in States in
northern, eastern and North-eastern parts of the country. The
Committee would like to be apprised of the initiatives undertaken
by the Government.
Promotion of Organic Farming
9. The Committee note that 7.23 lakh hectare land in the country,
excluding the wild harvest, is certified area under organic farming.
The Committee also note that there exist a large export market for
organic food products in international market and if given proper
guidance and incentives, the farmers are well placed to exploit the
opportunity and help the country to earn foreign exchange. APEDA
under the Department of Commerce functions as the Secretariat to
the National Programme on Organic Production (NPOP), which defines
the regulatory mechanism for export of organic produce. NPOP has
earned equivalence with European Union and Switzerland and now
any produce certified by Indian agencies can be exported to these
countries without the requirement of recertification. The
Government is providing financial assistance to private agencies/
individuals along with State Governments/Government agencies for
setting up of bio-fertilizer production units. The Government has
also launch Paramparagat Krishi Vikash Yojana (PKVY) under National
Mission on Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA) through which assistance
is being provided for organic farming. Under PKVY, the Government
plans to develop 10000 cluster with a cluster size of 50 acres so as
to increase certified area by 5 lakh hectares in next 3 years and to
develop potential market for organic products. The Committee are
of considered view that promotion of organic farming is urgently
88
required to safeguard surrounding environment and health of human
beings and animals from usage of chemical fertilizers and pesticides.
For this, it is imperative that the farmers of the country are given
direct financial support along with technical expertise and supervision
to switch to organic farming on a large scale. The Committee,
therefore, recommend that the Government should make concerted
and coordinated efforts in coordination with State Governments
and other stakeholders to augment coverage area and production of
organic farming in the country and for this purpose they may be
provided suitable incentive in terms of financial assistance and
technical expertise. Further, the Committee also desire that
extension services may also be strengthened in order to provide
guidance/assistance to the farmers during transition phase to organic
farming.
Effects of Excessive/Unscientific use of Pesticides
10. The Committee note that the chemical fertilizers and

Pesticides changed the face of agriculture in country by enhancing
agricultural production and productivity and making India self reliant
in foodgrains. Usage of pesticides has been an integral part of green
revolution strategy which not only enhanced foodgrain production
by reducing losses from weeds, diseases and insects/pests but also
helped in improving quality of crops/vegetables/fruits. However,
the Committee also note that pesticides have several drawbacks
such as potential toxicity to human and other species.
Excessive/unscientific use of pesticides has caused tremendous

harm to the environment as well as affected human population
indirectly. Pesticides causes various deteriorating health hazards in
animals as well as human beings. Pesticides such as organo-chlorine,
pyrethroids can cause cancer along with other neurological and
endocrine system disorders. According to Stockholm convention on
Persistent organic pollutants, 9 out of 12 most dangerous and
persistent organic chemicals are organo-chlorine pesticides. The
Committee also note the havoc caused to the local population due
to unscientific use of endosulphan in Kerala. Increasing incidents of
cancer are being reported among local population in Punjab where
pesticides use in agriculture is among the highest in the country.
The Committee also note about report of Centre for Science and
Environment in Punjab wherein, they established presence of
multiple pesticides in blood samples of residents in 4 villages in
Bhatinda and Ropar districts. However, according to the Department
of Health Research, the study didn’t attempt to correlate the
89
presence of pesticides to any observed health effects. The Committee
also take note of studies by Department of Health Research wherein,
effects of pesticides are being analyzed among exposed population
in the country. However, lack of funds is one of the constraints to
take up a comprehensive research on impact of pesticides and
fertilizers on human health.
The Committee note that 25 institutions in country are

monitoring pesticides level in food samples across the country under
‘Monitoring of Pesticides Residues at National level (MPRNL)’
programme of Ministry of Agriculture wherein, samples of vegetables,
fruits, pulses, spices, wheat, rice, fish etc. are collected and analysed
for possible presence of pesticides level. The Committee also note
that FSSAI have set standards for maximum pesticides residues in
food products and department of DAC & FW, FSSAI and State
Governments are responsible for ensuring compliance to these
standards. The Committee note with concern that unscientific and
excessive use of pesticides in agriculture and other sectors in the
country pose a real threat to the environment and the health of
human population as well. Since pesticides are mostly non-
biodegradable and persist in environment, there is possibility of
entry of pesticides in to human blood through the process of bio-
magnification through food chain. The Committee therefore are of
view that there is an imperative need for promoting scientific use
of pesticides in agriculture sector in our country. The Committee,
therefore, recommend that rigorous efforts in coordination with all
concerned may be made to create awareness amongst farmers for
scientific use of pesticides for increasing production and productivity
of their foodgrains. All State Governments may also be impressed
upon to strictly monitor pesticides level in food samples as per the
Standards set up by FSSAI on regular basis. The Committee also
recommend that the Government should also impress upon the
Ministry of Finance to provide adequate funds to the Department of
Health Research for undertaking comprehensive research on impact
of pesticides on human health. The Committee would like to be
apprised of the initiatives undertaken by the Department in this
regard.
Integrated Pest Management
11. The Committee note that the Government has adopted

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) as cardinal principle and main
plan of plant protection in the overall crop production programme
since 1985. IPM lays emphasis on Pest Management through a
90
combination of agronomic, chemical and biological methods. IPM
ensure the safe and judicious use of pesticides in agriculture. Timely
sowing, use of tolerant and resistant plant varieties, transgenic pest
resistant crops, bio-control agents and need based application of
chemical pesticides are basic tools of IPM tool box. The Committee
also note that Government is implementing various schemes namely
Strengthening & Modernization of Pest Management Approach in the
country (SMPMA), Strengthening & Modernization of Plant Quarantine
Facilities in India (SMPQF) and Monitoring of Pesticides Residues at
National Level (MPRNL) to achieve objectives outlined in IPM. The
Committee have also been informed that National Research Centre
for Integrated Pest Management (NRCIPM) is validating IPM
technologies in various crops and developed location specific
forecasting models of some crops under NICRA project and ICT based
e-pest surveillance system. Besides, National Institute of Plant Health
Management (NIPHM) assists the States and Government of India in
increasing the efficiency of the existing pest and disease surveillance
and control system, certification and accreditation system through
a core role as a training and adaptive research centre in the field
of extension and policy development related to plant protection.
The Government of India has established 31 Central Integrated Pest
Management Centres (CIPMCs) in 29 States and 1 UT. These CIPMCs
do take activities like training for farmers, training for State extension
officials, conducting farmers field schools etc. However, the
Committee are distressed to note that no specific allocations have
been made for achieving the objectives of IPM and budget allocated
for Central IPM centres is used for IPM work. The Committee,
therefore, recommend that adequate funds may be allocated for
IPM for achieving its objectives without any financial constraints.
The Committee would like the Department to impress upon the
Ministry of Finance for the purpose.
Regulation of import and use of Pesticides
12. The Committee note that 57353 MT (technical grade)

pesticides were used in country during 2014-15 (provisional).
However, the Committee also observe that use of pesticides in the
country is not even in different States. There is widespread use of
pesticides in States like Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab, Haryana,
Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal which were pioneer States during
green revolution. Further, the Committee also observe that 77376
MT (technical grade) pesticides worth Rs. 5122.09 crore were
imported in country during 2013-14. The Committee are also
perturbed to note that there is variation in use of pesticides in the
country and import figures and the Department of Chemical and
91
Petrochemical have received complaints about the same by local
manufacturers that multinational companies are importing
formulation rather than chemical grade and pushing these in local
markets. The Committee also note that DDT is still being used in
agriculture in some States despite its ban in the country. This only
goes to show that there is no effective regulatory mechanism to
ensure manufacturing, import and sale of pesticides in country in
terms of the provisions of Insecticides Act, 1968. The Committee,
therefore, recommend that the existing regulatory mechanism may
be strengthened in consultation with State Governments concerned
to check the acts which are contrary to the provisions of Insecticides
Act, 1968. The Committee also recommend that an enquiry may
also be conducted to find out inconsistency between import and
use of pesticides in the country along with diversion of DDT for
agriculture use and legal action may be taken against companies
which are indulged in such illegal acts.
Scientific Use of Pesticides
13. The Committee are concerned to note that problems

associated with unscientific and excessive use of pesticides have
not been addressed properly by the Government of India and State
Governments which is evident by rising cases of occupational
exposure and associated diseases such as cancer among local farmers
in Punjab and other places in the country. Besides creating awareness
and training of farmers for scientific use of pesticides in agriculture,
the Committee feel the need of distribution of protective gears and
pesticide sprinklers to the farmers to prevent them from unwanted
exposure of pesticides. The Committee are of considered view that
it is imperative that the use of pesticides in agriculture and other
sectors is supervised scientifically. The Committee are also of the
view that economic gains should not be achieved at the cost of
public health and the environment. The Committee, therefore,
recommend that a comprehensive action plan may be prepared by
the Government ensuring environment sustainable manufacturing,
import, sale and use of pesticides in agriculture as well as other
sectors including availability of safety gears to farmers and workers.
The Committee desire the Government to prepare action plan in
consultation with all stakeholders such as State Governments,
Agricultural Universities/Institutions, Chemical Pesticides
Manufacturers/Importers, Traders, Farmers along with Experts/NGOs
active in the field of agricultural management. The Committee also
desire the Government to allocate specific funds for implementation
of action plan for the purpose. The Committee would like to be
92
apprised of the steps taken by the Government in this regard. The
Committee also desired the Government to explore options to provide
license for sale of pesticides to the persons holding degree/diploma/
certificates in Agriculture Sciences.
Constitution of Pesticides Development and Regulation Authority
14. The Committee note that Insecticides Acts,1968 and

Insecticides rules, 1971 framed thereunder regulate import,
manufacture, sale, transport, distribution and use of insecticides
with a view to prevent risk to human beings or animals, and matter
connected therewith. Central Insecticide Board is constituted under
the Act to advise the Central and State Governments on technical
matters arising out of administration of this Act and to carryout
other functions assigned to the Board by or under this Act. The
Committee also note that Registration Committee constituted under
the Act is assigned responsibility for registration of pesticides after
scrutinizing formula, verifying claims of efficacy and safety to human
beings and animals, specifying the precautions against poisoning
and any other functions. Registration Committee are empowered to
refuse registration of any pesticides if issues pertaining to safety
have not been satisfactorily adhered to. The Central Insecticide
Board is empowered to ban manufacturing, import or sale of
pesticides if concerns are raised about danger to public health and
safety or any adverse report are received about toxic effect of any
pesticides. However, the Committee are perturbed to note that
there is no provision for periodic scientific evaluation of pesticides
used in the country and Central Insecticide Board doesn’t carry out
any research/study on its own and its advice to Government is
based on national and international literature/information available.
Further, action for ban of particular pesticides is taken only after
receipt of general information on ban or restriction of particular
pesticides in other countries. Ban on pesticides is based on the
recommendation of the Expert Committee constituted for the
purpose. The Committee are of view that present system of
registration of pesticides is not robust and hardly take care of
manipulation of systemic deficiency. Further, absence of ongoing
mechanism for periodic evaluation of efficacy and toxicity of
pesticides is posing danger to environment in general and public
health in particular. The Committee are of view that there is need
to streamline the regulatory mechanism for manufacturing, import
and sale of pesticides in the country. The Committee, therefore,
recommend the Government to take steps for constitution of
Pesticides Development and Regulation Authority after Parliamentary
93
approval for regulation of pesticide sector in the country. The
Committee desire the Government to start discussion with all
stakeholders for Constitution of such authority in a time-bound
manner.
Insecticides Act, 1968
15. The Committee were briefed by the Department of Chemical

and Petrochemical that while production of pesticides lies with them,
the usage of pesticides is administered by the Ministry of Agriculture.
So there is conflict of interest, in the admissibility of the provisions
of the Act of 1968. It was argued that as the Department of Chemical
and Petrochemicals is responsible for production of pesticides in
the country, administration of Insecticide Act should naturally be
done by them. The Committee are of view that there is an urgent
need for review of Insecticide Act, 1968 as the sector needs better
regulatory framework in order to safeguard environment and public
health. There is also a need for enhanced supervision and
coordination between Central and State Governments for regulation
of pesticides sector at ground level. The Committee, therefore
recommend the Government to take steps for revision of Insecticides
Act, 1968 in consultation with all stakeholders including farmers
organizations, experts and NGOs/research institutions active in
agricultural field. The Committee also desire the Government to
submit a report in this regard at the action taken stage.
NEW DELHI; HUKM DEO NARAYAN YADAV,

08 August, 2016 Chairperson,
17 Shravana, 1938 (Saka) Standing Committee on Agriculture.
94
ANNEXURE I
AICRP ON LONG TERM FERTILIZER EXPERIMENTS (LTFE)
Fertilizer is a key factor for increasing agricultural production and

its consumption in agriculture is increasing rapidly. Being chemical in
nature, it was felt to study the impact of fertilizers not only on the
crop yields and quality but also on the soil and environment particularly
under intensive cropping systems. This gave a call for a long term
studies at fixed sites for monitoring the changes in the nutrient dynamics
with the objectives of developing strategies for sustained productivity
by incorporating the intervention. The Indian Council of Agricultural
Research, accordingly, launched “All India Coordinated Research Project
on Long-Term Fertilizer Experiments (AICRP-LTFE)” in September 1970
with 11 centers and added 6 New centers during 1996-97.
Details of location, State and year of start of each center of

AICRP on LTFE
Sl.No. Location State Year of start
1. CRIJAF Barrackpore West Bangal 1971

2. PAU Ludhiana Punjab 1971
3. IARI New Delhi Delhi 1971
4. TNAU Coimbatore Tamil Nadu 1971
5. JNKVV Jabalpur Madhya Pradesh 1972
6. GKVK Bangalore Karnataka 1972
7. ANGRAU RRS Jagtial Andhra Pradesh 2000
8. OUAT Bhubaneswar Odisha 2002
9. BAU Ranchi Jharkhand 1972
10. CSKHPKV Palampur Himachal Pradesh 1972
11. GBPUA&T Pantnagar Uttarakhand 1971
12. JAU Junagadh Gujarat 1996
13. Dr. PDKV, Akola Maharashtra 1996
14. KAU Pattambi Kerala 1996
15. IGKV Raipur Chhattisgarh 1996
16. MPUA&T Udaipur Rajasthan 1996
17. MPKV Parbhani Maharashtra 1996
B Voluntary Centre
18. IASRI New Delhi Delhi 1972
95
Mandate
• To conduct coordinated long term fertilizer experiments in

different soil types under diversified cropping system.
• To study changes in soil quality, crop productivity and
sustainability.
• To collate information on long term soil fertility trials.
Objectives
➢ To study the effect of continuous use of plant nutrients

singly or in various combination on yield, uptake in multiple
cropping systems,
➢ To study the effect of application of secondary and
micronutrients (as per the need) on crop yield particularly
under intensive cropping programme,
➢ To work out the amount of nutrient removal by the crops,
➢ To monitor the changes in soil properties with respect to the
physical, chemical and microbiological characteristics of the
soil in relation to productivity.
Achievements
• Application on NPK plus Farm Yard Manure sustained good

soil health and higher crop productivity.
• Even in NPK fertilized system, the deficiency of micro and
secondary nutrients has become yield limiting factors after
a number of years and their application becomes necessary
to sustain high yield potential.
• Balanced use of nutrient did not have any adverse effect on
soil organic carbon rather resulted in increase in SOC. Thus,
data generated denied the Notion that use of chemical
fertilizer deteriorates Soil Organic Carbon (SOC).
• Carbon sequestration increased with balanced and integrated
nutrient management.
• FYM was found to be superior to lime as an amendment for
acid soils.
• Identified soil quality indicators using Principal Component
Analysis (PCA).
96
• Developed soil carbon and nitrogen model to study carbon
and nitrogen dynamics in soil and to predict soil carbon
sequestration and its forms in soil under different
management option.
97
ANNEXURE II
STATEMENT SHOWING STATE-WISE NUMBER OF SOIL TESTING

LABORATORIES IN THE COUNTRY, THEIR ANALYZING
CAPACITY AND UTILIZATION DURING 2012-13
Sl. Name of No. of Soil Testing Laboratories Total Annual Sample Capacity
No. the State Analyzing Analyzed Utilization
State Govt. Fert. Industry Capacity in '000' (%)
Static Mobile Static Mobile Static Mobile Total in '000'
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
I. South Zone
1. Andhra Pradesh 53 5 27 5 80 10 90 363.00 533.46 146.96
2. Karnataka 56 0 6 2 62 2 64 295.66 194.81 65.89
3. Kerala* 14 9 1 0 15 9 24 298.00 124.26 41.70
4. Tamil Nadu 30 16 1 1 31 17 48 2014.00 1136.27 56.42
5. Puducherry 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 4.00 4.41 110.25
6. A&N Islands* 1 1 0 0 1 1 2 12.00 4.73 39.42
Total 156 31 35 8 191 39 230 2986.66 1997.94 66.90
II. West Zone
7. Gujarat 132 2 4 1 136 3 139 1411.00 1189.56 84.31
8. Madhya Pradesh 24 0 3 4 27 4 31 282.00 312.41 110.78
9. Maharashtra 123 23 8 4 131 27 158 1059.00 985.72 93.08
10. Rajasthan 33 23 1 2 34 25 59 528.00 415.58 78.71
11. Chhattisgarh 7 5 1 0 8 5 13 105.00 95.91 91.34
12. Goa 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 25.00 18.97 75.88
Total 321 53 17 11 338 64 402 3410.00 3018.15 88.51
III. North Zone
13. Haryana 35 1 2 0 37 1 38 362.00 443.48 122.51
14. Punjab 54 12 2 3 56 15 71 631.50 282.11 44.67
15. Uttarakhand 13 3 0 0 13 3 16 106.54 94.67 88.86
98
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
16. Uttar Pradesh 255 18 6 3 261 21 282 4176.50 3432.28 82.18

17. Himachal Pradesh 11 4 0 0 11 4 15 125.00 123.36 98.69
18. Jammu and Kashmir 8 5 0 0 8 5 13 52.00 43.61 83.87
19. Delhi 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 5.00 0.46 9.20
Total 377 43 10 6 387 49 436 5458.54 4419.97 80.97
IV. East Zone
20. Bihar 39 0 0 0 39 0 39 230.00 259.3 112.74
21. Jharkhand 8 0 0 0 8 0 8 80.00 7.37 9.21
22. Odisha 15 6 1 0 16 6 22 230.00 205.70 89.43
23. West Bengal 10 8 0 2 10 10 20 116.00 55.17 47.56
Total 72 14 1 2 73 16 89 656.00 527.54 80.42
V. NE Zone
24. Assam* 7 4 0 0 7 4 11 84.00 60.76 72.33
25. Tripura 2 4 0 0 2 4 6 32.00 8.48 26.50
26. Manipur* 4 1 0 0 4 1 5 40.00 1.37 3.43
27. Meghalaya 3 3 0 0 3 3 6 40.00 24.78 61.95
28. Nagaland 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 45.00 14.50 32.22
29. Arunachal Pradesh 3 3 0 0 3 3 6 15.00 14.23 94.87
30. Sikkim 4 2 0 0 4 2 6 37.00 18.43 49.81
31. Mizoram 3 3 0 0 3 3 6 27.00 25.00 92.59
Total 29 20 0 0 29 20 49 320.00 167.55 52.36
Grand Total 955 161 63 27 1018 188 1206 12831.20 10131.2 78.96
(94 Static & 23 mobile STLs under PPP Mode in Maharashtra included in this Statement)
*information not provided but taken previous years progress report.
99
ANNEXURE III
WORKSHOPS AND TRAINING PROGRAMMES ORGANIZED

BY ICAR INSTITUTES ON INTEGRATED NUTRIENT
MANAGEMENT IN THE COUNTRY
2010-11
• Model Training Course (MTC) on ‘Farmers’ Resource based

Site Specific Nutrient Management in different production
systems was organized during 31 January to 4 February 2011.
• A model training course of Eight days on Conservation
Agriculture (CA) for improved soil quality and crop
productivity on rainfed Vertisols was conducted at IISS, Bhopal
from 24 September to 01 October 2010 sponsored by the DO
AC, GoI.
2011-12
• A Model Training Course (MTC) on ‘Soil Organic Matter

Management for Climate Resilient Agriculture’ was organized
at IISS, Bhopal during 14-21 February 2012.
• A model training course sponsored by Directorate of Extension,
Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi on
‘Best Soil and Water Management Practices for Resource Use
Efficiency’ was organized during 17-24 October 2011.
• National training programme on ‘Assessment of quality and
resilient of Soils’ sponsored by NAIP (ICAR) was organized at
the IISS, Bhopal during 09-13 January 2012.
• Organized and conducted 14 days national training on ‘Climate
change carbon sequestration and carbon trading’ sponsored
by NAIP, ICAR, New Delhi at IISS, Bhopal during 05-18 April
2011.
2012-13
• A MTC on ‘Conservation Agriculture for sustaining organic

Carbon, Quality and Productivity in Rainfed Region’ during
10th-17th September, 2012 sponsored by Ministry of
Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi.
100
• A model training course on ‘Organic and agricultural waste
management for enhancing nutrient use efficiency’ during
15th to 22nd October, 2012 sponsored by Ministry of
2013-14
• Training programme on ‘Soil testing for primary, secondary

and micronutrient’ during Organized thrice between 12-15,
18-21 and 26-29 June, 2013 sponsored by Government of
Madhya Pradesh.
• National training programme on ‘Climate change, Carbon
sequestration and Carbon credits’ during 23 August to
5 September, 2013 sponsored by NAIP.
• MTC on ‘Improving Nutrient Use Efficiency through Agronomic
Measures for Major Crops of India’ during 12-19 November,
2013 sponsored by Ministry of Agriculture, Government of
India, New Delhi.
• MTC on ‘Assessment of Soil Health for Higher Productivity’
during 3-10 December, 2013 Sponsored by Ministry of
• Training programme on ‘Soil Health Management — Training
on Leaf Analysis and Soil Analysis’ during 16-20 December,
2013, 14-18 January, 2014 and 10-14 February, 2014 sponsored
by State Department of Agriculture, Government of Kerala.
• Workshop cum training programme on Soil Fertility Mapping
during 11-12 April, 2013.
• Training-cum-Workshop on Soil Fertility Management for KVK
personnels of M.P. Chhattisgarh and Odisha during 3-4 May,
2013 organized in collaboration with Zonal Project
Directorate, Zone-VII, Jabalpur.
2014-15
• Short Course on Advances in nutrient dynamics in Soil-Plant-

Atmospheric systems for improving nutrient use efficiency
during September 02-11, 2014 sponsored by ICAR, New Delhi.
• Model training Course on ‘Best nutrient management practices
for major crops and cropping systems of India’ during October
07-14, 2014 training sponsored by Ministry of Agriculture,
Government of India, New Delhi.
101
• Winter School training on Waste Recycling and Resource
management through Rapid Composting Techniques during
December, 3-23, 2014 Sponsored by ICAR, New Delhi.
• Model Training Course (MTC) on Climate Change and
Conservation Agriculture during January 28 to February 04,
2015 training sponsored by Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of
India, New Delhi.
• Training-cum-Workshop on Soil Health and Fertility
Management during May 7-9, 2014.
• Interactive Workshop on Contingency planning for kharif crops
under delayed monsoon in Malawa plateau region of
Madhya Pradesh on July 03, 2014.
• Training programme on farmers’ friendly technologies for
improved crop production for the farmers of Mengra Kalan
village (Bhopal district) of Madhya Pradesh during July 9-11,
2014.
• Training programme on ‘Soil Health and Balanced Fertilization’
for the farmers of Sehore district of Madhya Pradesh during
July 14-18, 2014.
for the farmers of Shivapuri district of Madhya Pradesh during
October 14-18, 2014.
for the farmers of Guna district of Madhya Pradesh during
November 24-28, 2014.
for the farmers East Champaran district of Bihar during
December 08-12, 2014.
• Training programme on Soil Health Management for
sustainable production during March 24-25, 2015 at IISS,
Bhopal.
102
ANNEXURE IV
IPNS PACKAGES FOR DOMINANT CROPPING SYSTEM IN DIFFERENT

AGRO-CLIMATIC REGIONS OF THE COUNTRY
Table 1—Recommended IPNS for Western Himalayan Region
Cropping System Fertilizer recommendation IPNS package
1 2 3
Rice—Wheat Rice: 120 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 Rice: 40 kg N + FYM/Green Manure @ 15 t/ha +

20 kg Zinc sulphate (in Zn deficient soils)
Wheat: 120 kg N + 80 kg Wheat: 120 kg N + 80 kg P2O5 (through SSP) +
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O 40 kg K2O
Maize—Wheat Maize: 120 kg N + 60 kg Maize: 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 (through SSP) + 20
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O kg K2O + 10 t FYM + fresh Eupatorium/Lantana
Mulch @ 1Ot/ha
Wheat: 120 kg N + 60 kg Wheat: 80 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 (through SSP) + 15
P2O5 + 30 kg K2O kg K2O
Liming @3-4 q/ha in furrows at the time of sowing for soils having pH<5.5
Table 2—Recommended IPNS Packages for Eastern Himalayan

Region
Rice—Rice Rice: 60 kg N + 30 kg Rice: 20 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 + 15 kg K20 +FYM/

P2O5 + 25 kg K2O GM @ 10t/ha + Azolla @ 10t/ha + 20 kg Zinc
Sulphate once in 3 years + 5 kg borax + 1 kg
ammonium molybdate + 5 kg copper sulphate
Rice: 80 kg N + 40 kg Rice : 60 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 25 kg K20 + Azolla
P2O5 + 20 kg K2O @ 1Ot/ha
Rice—Wheat Rice: 80 kg N + 40 kg Rice: 40 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 + 40 kg K20 + FYM@
P2O5 + 50 kg K2O 5t/ha/GM + Azolla @ 1Ot/ha + 20 kg Zinc
Sulphate once in 3 years + 5 kg borax + 1 kg
ammonium molybdate + 5 kg copper sulphate
Rice: 80 kg N + 40 kg Rice: 50 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 + FYM @ 5t/ha
P2O5 + 30 kg K2O
Rice—Mustard Rice: 80 kg N + 40 kg Rice: 40 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 (through SSP) + 40
P2O5 + 50 kg K2O kg K20 + FYM/GM @ 1Ot/ha + Azolla @ 1Ot/ha
+ 20 kg Zinc Sulphate once in 3 years + 5 kg
borax + 1 kg ammonium molybdate + 5 kg copper
Sulphate
103
1 2 3
Mustard : 40 kg N + 20 kg Mustard : 20 kg N +10 kg P2O5 (through SSP) +

P2O5 + 30 kg K2O + 10 kg S 25 kg K20
Rice—Potato Rice: 80 kg N + 40 kg Rice : 40 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 + 15 kg K20 + Azolla/
P2O5 + 25 kg K2O GM @ 1Ot/ha + 20 kg Zinc Sulphate once in 3
years + 5 kg borax + 1 kg ammonium molybdate
+ 5 kg copper sulphate
Potato: 50 kg N + 100 Potato: 50 kg N + 50 kg P2O5 + 30 kg K20 + FYM@
P2O5 + 50 kg K2O 1Ot/ha + seed treatment with Azotobacter and
PSB
Table 3—Recommended IPNS Packages for power Gangetic plain
Rice—Rice Rice: 80 kg N + 60 kg Rice: 60 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 + 30 kg K20 + FYM/

P2O5 + 40 kg K2O GM @ 1Ot/ha + 20 kg Zinc Sulphate
Rice (HYV): 120 kg N + 80 kg Rice: 90 kg N + 80 kg P2O5 + 60 kg K20 + Azolla@
P2O5 + 60 kg K2O 1Ot/ha
Rice—Wheat Rice: 80 kg N + 60 kg Rice: 40 kg N + 45 kg P2O5 + 30 kg K20 + FYM/
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O GM @ 1Ot/ha + Azolla @ 1Ot/ha/BGA @ 10 kg/
ha + kg Zinc Sulphate
Wheat: 120 kg N + 60 Wheat: 90 kg N + 45 P2O5 + 45 kg K20
P2O5 + 60 kg K2O
Jute—Rice—Potato Jute: 40 kg N + 20 kg Jute : 30 kg N + FYM @ 5t/ha
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O
Rice: 60 kg N + 30 kg Rice : 30 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 30 kg K20 + Azolla
P2O5 + 30 kg K2O @ 10t/ha/BGA@ 10 kg/ha + 20 kg Zinc Sulphate
Potato: 180 kg N + 80 kg Potato : 150 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 + 100 kg K20 +
P2O5 + 120 kg K2O FYM@ 5t/ha + seed treatment with Azotobacter
and PSB
Table 4—Recommended IPNS Packages for middle Gangetic plain
Rice—Wheat Rice: 100 kg N + 60 kg Rice : 50 kg.N + 30 kg P 2O5 + 20 kg K20 + Green

P2O5 + 40 kg K2O Manure (greengram/stover) 20 kg Zinc Sulphat
(in calcareous soils)
Wheat: 120 kg N + 80 Wheat: 90 kg N + 60 P2O5 + 30 kg K20 + FYM@
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O 1Ot/ha
OR
104
1 2 3
Rice : 75 kg N + 45 kg P2O5 + 30 kg K2O + BGA

@ 15 kg/ha + FYM @ 10t/ha + 20 kg z'inc
Sulphate (in calcareous soils)
Wheat: 100 kg N + 65 kg P2O5 + 30 kg K2O
Maize—Wheat Maize: 100 kg N + 60 Maize: 90 kg N + 60 P2O5 (through SSP) + 30 kg
P2O5 + 30 kg K2O + 40 kg S K2O + GM + 16 kg borax (in calcareous soil)
and 16 kg borax
(in calcareous soil)
Wheat: 120 kg N + 80 Wheat: 90 kg N + 60 kg P2O5 + 30 kg K2O +
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O FYM@ 1Ot/ha
Table 5—Recommended IPNS Packages for upper Gangetic plain
Rice—Wheat Rice: 120 kg N + 60 kg Rice : 90 kg N + 30 kg K2O + FYM/GM (Sesbania/

P2O5 + 40 kg K2O + 20 kg Leucaena Lopping) @ 1Ot/ha
Zinc Sulphate
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O + 40 kg S kg K2O
Maize—Wheat/ Maize : 100 kg N + 60 kg Maize : 50 kg N + 20 kg K2O + FYM @ 1Ot/ha
Mustard P2O5 + 40 kg K2O
Mustard: 80 kg N + 50 kg Mustard: 60 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 (through SSP) +
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O 30 kg K2O
Sugarcane—Potato Sugarcane (Autumn planting): Sugarcane (Autumn planting) : 100 kg N + 45 kg
180 kg N + 60 kg P2O5 + 40 kg P 2 O 5 + 30 + Sulphitation pressmud/GM +
K2O Incorporation of Potato foliage.
Potato (Intercropping): 180 kg Potato (Intercropping): 135 kg N + 20 kg
N + 60 kg P2O5 + 80 kg K2O P2O5 + 60 kg K2O + FYM 2 10t/ha + seed treatment
with Azotabacter and PSB * (In case of ratoon
crop, incorporate sugarcane frash along with only
75 kg N)
Sugarcane—Wheat Sugarcane (Autumn planting): Sugarcane (Autumn planting): 135 kg N + 45 kg
180 kg N + 60 kg P2O5 + 40 kg P2O5 + 30 t (FYM/ Sulphitation pressmud)/GM
K2O (Sesbania/Sunhemp/cowpea @ 10t/ha
Wheat (Intercropping): Wheat (Intercropping): 80 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 + 40
120 kg N + 60 kg P2O5 + kg K2O
60 kg K2O *(In case of ratoon crop, incorporates sugarcane
frash along with only 75 kg N)
105
1 2 3
Table 6—Recommended IPNS Packages for Trans Gangetic plain
Rice/Cotton/ Rice: 120 kg N + 60 kg Rice: 60 kg N + 30 kg K2O + FYM/poultry manure/

Maize/Bajra— P2O5 + 60 kg K2O + 20 kg GM @ 1Ot/ha
Wheat Zinc Sulphate
Maize: 120 kg N + 60 kg Maize: 70 kg N + FYM/GM (sesbania/cowpea) @
P2O5 +30 kg K2O + 20 kg 1Ot/ha
Zinc Sulphate
Cotton: 120 kg N + 30 kg Cotton : 120 kg N
P2O5 + 30 kg K2O
Bajra: 90 kg N + 60 kg P2O5 Bajra: 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 FYM @ 10 t/ha
P2O5 + 30 kg K2O kg K2O + Azotobactor/Azospirilliutn + PSB
Table 7—Recommended IPNS for Eastern Plateau & Hills
Rice-Winter Rice: 60 kg N+ 30 kg Rice: 30 kg N + 15 kg P2O5 (through SSP ) + 15

Maize/Wheat/ P2O5 + 30 kg K2O + 20 kg kg K2O + FYM/GM @ 1Ot/ha + 15 kg BGA
Pulses Zinc Sulphate
Winter Maize: 120 kg N + Winter Maize: 100 kg N + 45 kg P2O5 (through
60 kg P2O5 + 30 kg K2O SSP) + 20 kg K2O
Pulses : 20 kg N + 40 kg Pulses: 10 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 (through SSP) + FYM
P2O5 + 20 kg K2O + @ 2.5t/ha + Rhizobium + 500 g PSB
Rhizobium + 20 kg S +
micronutrient Mixtures
Table 8—Recommended IPNS practices for Central Plateau & Hills
Rice-Wheat/ Rice: 100 kg N+ 30 kg Rice: 75 kg N + FYM/Green Manure @ 5t/ha

Mustard P2O5 + 40 kg K2O
Wheat: 120 kg N + 60 kg Wheat: 90 kg N +45 kg P2O5 + 30 kg K2O
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O
Mustard : 60 kg N + 30 kg Mustard.: 30 kg N + 15 kg P2O5 + 10 kg K2O FYM
P2O5 + 20 kg K2O @ 10 t/ha.
106
1 2 3
Soybean—Wheat Soybean: 20 kg N+ 60 kg Soybean: 10 kg N+ 25 kg P2O5 (through Boronated

P2O5 + 20 kg K2O + B + S SSP) + 4t FYM+ Rhizobium + 25 kg Zinc Sulphate
Wheat: 120 kg N + 60 kg in alternate years
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O Wheat: 90 kg N + 45 kg P2O5 (through SSP)
Rice—Gram Rice: 100 kg N+ 30 kg Rice: 25 kg N + 15 kg P2O5 + pulse crop residue
P2O5 + 30 kg K2O Incorporation + BGA @ 10 kg/ha/Azolla @ 1Ot/
ha
Gram: 20 kg N+ 40 kg Gram: 10 kg N+ 20 kg P2O5 + Rhizobium + 5t FYM
P2O5 + 20 kg K2O +Rhizobium + 500 PSB
Table 9—Recommended IPNS Practices for Western Plateau & Hills
Soybean—Wheat Soybean: 20 kg N + 60 kg Soybean: 10 kg N + 25 kg P2O5 (through SSP)+ 4t

P2O5 + 20 kg K2O + B + S FYM + Rhizobium + 25 kg Zinc Sulphate in
alternate year
Wheat: 120 kg N + 60 kg Wheat: 90 kg N + 45 kg P2O5 (through SSP)
P2O5 +40 kg K2O
Cotton—Fallow/ Cotton: 100 kg N + 50 kg Cotton: 50 kg N + 25 kg P2O5 + 25 kg K2O + seed
Pigeon Pea/ P2O5 + 50 kg K2O treatment with Azotobacter + 4 t FYM/in situ
Wheat Green manuring (cowpea) followed by mulching
with subabul loppings
Pigeon Pea: 20 kg N + 40 kg Pigeon pea: 10 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 (through SSP)
P2O5 + 20 kg K2O + + 10 kg K2O + FYM @ 2.5 t/ha + Rhizobium + 500
Rhizobium + 20 kg S + g PSB
Micronutrient Mixture
Wheat: 120 kg N + 60 kg Wheat: 90 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 (through SSP ) + 30
P2O5 + 30 kg K2O kg K2O + Azotobactor/AzospiriIlium + PSB
Table 10—Recommended IPNS Packages for Southern Plateau and

Hills, East Coast Plains and chats and West Coast Plains Regions
Rice—Rice Rice: 100 kg N+ 30 kg Rice: 75 kg N + 15 kg P2O5 + 15 kg K2O + FYM/

P2O5 + 30 kg K2O Green Manure @ 5t/ha
Rice : 120 kg N + 60 kg Rice: 90 kg N + 60 kg P2O5 + 40 kg K2O + 40 kg
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O K2O + Azolla @ 10 t /ha BGA @ 10 kg/ha + 20
kg Zinc Sulphates
107
1 2 3
Rice—Pulses Rice: 100 kg N + 30 kg Rice: 25 kg N+ 15 kg K2O + pulse crop residue

P2O5 + 30 kg K2O incorporation + BGA @ 10 kg/ha/Azolla @ 10t/
ha
Pulses : 20 kg N + 40 kg Pulses: 10 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 + 10 kg K2O +
P2O5 +20 kg K2O + Rhizobium Rhizobium + 2.5 T FYM + 500 g PSB
Table 11—Recommended IPNS Packages for Gujarat plains & Hills

Regions
Groundnut/ Groundnut: 20 kg N + 40 kg Groundnut: 15 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 (through SSP)

Wheat/Mustard P2O5 + 60 kg K2O + 45 kg K2O + Gypsum @ 250 kg/ha in furrow +
25 kg Zinc Sulphate + 1 kg Boron
P2O5 + 30 kg K2O kg K2O + Azotobactor/Azospirillium + PSB
Mustard: 60 kg N + 30 kg Mustard: 30 kg N + 15 kg P2O5 (through SSP) +
P2O5 + 20 kg K2O 10kg K2O + FYM@ 10 t/ha
Cotton-Castor Cotton: 100 kg N + 40 kg Cotton: 50 kg N + 25 kg P2O5 + 25 kg K2O + seed
P2O5 + 40 kg K2O treatment with Azotobacter + 4 t FYM
Castor (irrigated): 40 kg N + Castor (irrigated): 25 kg N + 50 kg P2O5 (through
60 kg P2O5 SSP )+ 1 t castor seed cake/FYM @ 5t/ha + seed
treatment with Azospirillium and PSB @ 5 kg/ha
Table 12—Recommended IPNS Packages for Western Dry Regions
Kharif Pulses— Kharif pulses: 20 kg N + Pulses : 10 kg N+20 kg P2O5 +10 kg K2O +

Fallow 40 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O + Rhizobium + 2.5 t FYM
Rhizobium
Pearl millet— Pearl millet: 50 kg N + 30 kg Pearl millet: 25 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 (through
mustard P2O5 + 15kg K2O SSP)+ 10 kg K2O + Azotobacter/Azospirillium
Mustard : 60 kg N + 30 kg Mustard: 45 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 (through SSP)+ 15
P2O5 + 20 kg K2O + S kg K2O + FYM @ 5t/ha
108
ANNEXURE V
MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
(Food Safety and Standards Authority of India)

Notification
New Delhi, dated the 1st August, 2011
F.No. 2-15015/30/2010 Whereas in exercise of the powers conferred

by clause (i) of sub section (2) of section 92 read with section 20 of
Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (34 of 2006) the Food Safety and
Standards Authority of India proposes to make Food Safety and Standards
Regulations in so far as they relates to Food Safety and Standards
(Contaminants, Toxins and Residues) Regulations, 2011, and;
Whereas these draft Regulations were published in consolidated

form at pages 1 to 776 in the Gazette of India Extraordinary Part III -
Section 4 dated 20lh October, 2010 inviting objections and suggestions
from all persons likely to be affected thereby before the expiry of the
period of thirty days from the date on which the copies of the Gazette
containing the said notification were made available to the public;
And whereas the copies of the Gazette were made available to the
public on the 21st October, 2010;
And whereas objections and suggestions received from the

stakeholders within the specified period on the said draft Regulations
have been considered and finalized by the Food Safety and Standards
Authority of India.
Now therefore, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India

hereby make the following Regulations, namely,—
FOOD SAFETY AND STANDARDS (CONTAMINANTS, TOXINS AND

RESIDUES) REGULATIONS, 2011
CHAPTER 1
GENERAL
1.1 Short title and commencement—
1.1.1 These regulations may be called the Food Safety and Standards
(Contaminants, Toxins and Residues) Regulations, 2011.
109
1.1.2 These regulations shall come into force on or after 5th August,
2011
1.2: Definitions—
1.2.1 In these regulations unless the context otherwise requires:
1. “Crop contaminant” means any substance not intentionally

added to food, but which gets added to articles of food in the
process of their production (including operations carried out in crop
husbandry, animal husbandry and veterinary medicine), manufacture,
processing, preparation, treatment, packing, packaging transport
or holding of articles of such food as a result of environmental
contamination
CHAPTER 2
CONTAMINANTS, TOXINS AND RESIDUES
2.1 METAL CONTAMINANTS
2.1.1
1. Chemicals described in monographs of the Indian Pharmacopoeia

when used in foods, shall not contain metal contaminants beyond the
limits specified in the appropriate monographs of the Indian
Pharmacopoeia for the time being in force.
2. Notwithstanding the provisions of regulation 2.1.1 (1), no article

of food specified in Column 2 of the table below shall contain any
metal specified in excess of the quantity specified in Column 3 of the
said table:—
Table
Name of the Article of food Parts per Million

metal by weight
contaminants
1 2 3
1. Lead (i) Beverages;

Concentrated soft drinks (but not including concentrates 0.5
used in the manufacture of soft drinks)
Fruit and vegetable juice (including tomato juice, 1.0
but not including lime juice and lemon juice)
110
1 2 3
Concentrates used in the manufacture of soft drinks, 2.0

lime juice and lemon juice.
(ia) Baking powder 10
(ib) Edible oils and fats 0.5
(ic) Infant Milk substitute and Infant foods 0.2
(id) Turmeric whole and powder 10.0
(ii) Other foods
Anhydrous dextrose and dextrose monohydrate, edible 0.5
oils & fats, refined white sugar (sulphated ash content
not exceeding 0.03 per cent)
Ice-cream, iced lollies and similar frozen confections 1.0
Canned fish, canned meats, edible gelatin, meat 5.0
extracts and hydrolysed protein, dried or dehydrated
vegetables (other than onions)
All types of sugar, sugar syrup, invert sugar and direct 5.0
consumption coloured sugars with sulphated ash
content exceeding 1.0 per cent
Raw sugars except those sold for direct consumption 5.0
or used for manufacturing purpose other than the
manufacture of refined sugar
Edible molasses, caramel liquid and solid glucose and 5.0
starch conversion products with a sulphated ash content
exceeding 1.0 per cent
Cocoa powder 5.0 on the dry fat
free substance
Yeast and yeast products 5.0 on the dry
matter
Tea, dehydrated onions, dried herbs and spices flavourings, 10.0 on the dry
alginic acid, alignates, agar, carrageen and similar matter
products derived from seaweed
Liquid pectin, chemicals not otherwise specified, used 10.0
as ingredients or in the preparation or processing of food
Food colouring other than caramel 10.0 on the dry
colouring matter
111
1 2 3
Solid pectin 50.0

Hard boiled sugar confectionery 2.0
Iron fortified common salt 2.0
Corned beef, luncheon meat, Cooked Ham, Chopped 2.5
meat, Canned chicken, Canned mutton and Goat meat
and other related meat products
Brewed vinegar and Synthetic vinegar Nil
(iii) Foods not specified 2.5
2. Copper (i) Beverages:
Soft drinks excluding concentrates and Carbonated water 7.0
Carbonated water 1.5
Toddy 5.0
Concentrates for soft drinks 20.0
(ii) Other Foods
Chicory-dried or roasted, coffee beans, flavourings/ 30.0
pectin liquid
Colouring matter 30.0 on dry
colouring matter
Edible gelatin 30.0
Tomato ketchup 50.0 on the dried
total solids
Yeast and yeast products 60.0 on the dry
matter
Cocoa powder 70.0 on the fat
free substance
Tomato puree, paste, powder, juice and cocktails 100.0 on the
dried tomato
solid
Tea 150.0
Pectin-solid 300.0
112
1 2 3
Iron Fortified Common Salt 2.0

Turmeric whole and powder 5.0
Juice of orange, grape, apple, tomato, pineapple and 5.0
lemon
Pulp and pulp products of any fruit 5.0
Infant milk substitute and Infant foods 15.0 (But not less
than 2.8)
Brewed Vinegar and Synthetic vinegar Nil
Caramel 20
(iii) Foods not specified 30.0
3. Arsenic (i) Milk 0.1
(ii) Beverages:
Soft drink intended for consumption after dilution 0.5
except carbonated water
Carbonated water 0.25
Infant Milk substitute and Infant foods 0.05
Turmeric whole and powder 0.1
Juice of orange, grape, apple, tomato, pineapple and 0.2
lemon
Preservatives, anti-oxidants, emulsifying and stabilising 3.0 on dry matter
agents and synthetic food colours
Ice-cream, iced lollies and similar frozen confections 05
Dehydrated onions, edible gelatin, liquid pectin 2.0
Chicory-dried or roasted 4.0
Dried herbs, finings and clearing agents, solid pectin all 5.0
grades, spices
Food colouring other than synthetic colouring 5.0 on dry
colouring matter
Iron Fortified Common Salt 1.0
113
1 2 3
Brewed Vinegar and Synthetic Vinegar 0.1

(iii) Foods not specified 1-1
4. Tin (i) Processed and canned products 250.0
(i-a) Hard boiled sugar confectionery 5.0
(i-aa) Jam, Jellies and Marmalade 250
Juice of orange, apple, tomato, pineapple and lemon 250
Pulp and pulp products of any fruit 250
(i-b) Infant Milk substitute and Infant foods 5.0
(i-c) Turmeric whole and powder Nil
(i-d) Corned beef, Luncheon meat, Cooked Ham, 250
Chopped meat, Canned chicken, Canned mutton and
Goat meat
(ii) Foods not specified 250
5. Zinc (i) Ready-to-drink beverages 5.0
Juice of orange, grape, tomato, pipeapple and lemon 5.0
(i-a) Infant milk substitute and Infant foods 50.0 (but not less
than 25.0)
(ii) Edible gelatin 100.0
(ii-a) Turmeric whole and powder 25.0
(iii) Fruit and Vegetable products 50.0
(iii-a) Hard boiled sugar confectionery 5.0
(iv) Foods not specified 50.0
6. Cadmium (i) Infant Milk substitute and Infant foods 0.1
(ii) Turmeric whole and powder 0.1
(iii) Other foods 1.5
7. Mercury Fish 0.5
Other foods 1.0
8. Methyl Mercury All foods 0.25
(Calculated as
the element)
114
1 2 3
9. Chromium Refined Sugar 20ppb

10. Nickel All hydrogenated, partially hydrogenated, interesterified 1.5
vegetable oils and fats such as vanaspati, table margarine,
bakery and industrial margarine, bakery shortening, fat
spread and partially hydrogenated soyabean oil
2.2 Crop contaminants and naturally occurring toxic substances
2.2.1
1. No article of food specified in column (2) of the Table below

shall contain any crop contaminant specified in the corresponding entry
in column (1) thereof in excess of quantities specified in the
corresponding entry in column (3) of the said table:
Sl. Name of the Article of Food Limit µg/kg

No. Contaminants
1. Aflatoxin All articles of food 30

2. Aflatoxin M1 Milk 0.5
3. Patulin Apple juice & Apple juice 50
ingredients in other beverages
4. Ochratoxin A Wheat, barley & rye 20
2. Naturally occurring Toxic Substances.
The toxic substances specified in column (1) of the Table below,

which may occur naturally in any article of food, shall not exceed the
limit specified in the corresponding entry in column (2) of the said
Table:—
Sl.No. Name of substance Maximum limit
1. Agaric acid 100 ppm
2. Hydrocyanic acid 5 ppm
3. Hypericine 1 ppm
4. Saffrole 10 ppm
115
2.3 Residues
2.3.1 Restriction on the use of insecticides.
(1) Subject to the Provisions of regulation 2.3.1 (2), no insecticides

shall be used directly on articles of food:
Provided that nothing in this regulation shall apply to the fumigants

which are registered and recommended for use as such on articles of
food by the Registration Committee, constituted under section 5 of the
Insecticides Act, 1968 (46 of 1968).
(2) The amount of insecticide mentioned in Column 2 on the foods

mentioned in column 3, shall not exceed the tolerance limit prescribed
in column 4 of the Table given below:
Sl.No. Name of Insecticides Food Tolerance limit

(mg/kg.ppm)
1 2 3 4
1. Aldrin, dieldrin (the limits apply to Foodgrains 0.01

aldrin and dieldrin singly or in any Milled Foodgrains Nil
combination and are expressed as Milk and Milk products 0.15 (on a fat basis)
dieldrin) Fruits and Vegetables 0.1
Meat 0.2
Eggs 0.1 (on a shell free
basis)
2. Carbaryl Fish 0.2
Foodgrains 1.5
Milled foodgrains Nil
Okra and leafy vegetables 10.0
Potatoes 0.2
Other vegetables 5.0
Cotton seed (whole) 1.0
Maize cob (kernels) 1.0
Rice 2.50
Maize 0.50
Chillies 5.00
3. Chlordane (residue to be measured as Foodgrains 0.02
cis plus trans chlordane) Milled foodgrains Nil
Milk and milk products 0.05 (on a fat basis)
Vegetables 0.2
Fruits 0.1
Sugar beet 0.3
116
1 2 3 4
4. D.D.T. (The limits apply to D.D.T., Milk and milk products 1.25 (on a fat basis)
D.D.D. and D.D.E. singly or in any Fruits and vegetables 3.5
combination) including potato
Meat, poultry and fish 7.0 (on a whole
product basis)
Eggs 0.5 (on a shell free
basis)
5. D.D.T. (singly) Carbonated Water 0.001
6. D.D.D. (singly) Carbonated Water 0.001
7. D.D.E. (singly) Carbonated Water 0.001
8. Diazinon Foodgrains 0.05
Vegetables 0.5
9. Dichlorvos [content of di- Foodgrains 1.0
chloroacetaldehyde (D.C.A.) Milled foodgrains 0.25
be reported where possible] Vegetables 0.15
Fruits 0.1
10. Dicofol Fruits and Vegetables 5.0
Tea (dry manufactured) 5.0
Chillies 1.0
11. Dimethoate (residue to be determined Fruits and Vegetables 2.0
as dimethoate and expressed as Chillies 0.5
dimethoate)
12. Endosulfan (residues are measured and Fruits and Vegetables 2.0
reported as total of endosulfan A and Cotton seed 0.5
B and endosulfan-sulphate) Cotton seed oil (crude) 0.2
Bengal gram 0.20
Pigeon Pea 0.10
Fish 0.20
Chillies 1.0
Cardamom 1.0
13. Endosulfan A Carbonated Water 0.001
14. Endosulfan B Carbonated Water 0.001
15. Endosulfan-Sulphate Carbonated Water 0.001
16. Fenitrothion Foodgrains 0.02
Milled foodgrains 0.005
117
1 2 3 4
Milk and Milk Products 0.05 (on a fat basis)

Fruits 0.5
Vegetables 0.3
Meat 0.03
17. Heptachlor (combined residues of Foodgrains 0.01
heptachlor and its epoxide to be Milled foodgrains 0.002
determined and expressed as Milk and Milk Products 0.15(on a fat basis)
Heptachlor) Vegetables 0.05
18. Hydrogen cyanide Foodgrains 37.5
19. Hydrogen Phosphide Foodgrains Nil
20. Inorganic bromide (determined and Foodgrains 25.0
expressed as total bromide from all Milled Foodgrains 25.0
sources) Fruits 30.0
Dried fruits 30.0
Spices 400.00
21. Hexachlorocycle hexane and its Isomers Rice grain unpolished 0.10
(a) Alfa (œ) Isomer: Rice grain Polished 0.05
Milk (whole) 0.02
Fruits and vegetables 1.00
Fish 0.25
Carbonated Water 0.001
(b) Beta (P) Isomer: Rice grain Unpolished 0.10
Rice grain Polished 0.05
Milk (whole) 0.02
Fish 0.25
(c) Gamma (y) Isomer: Foodgrains except rice 0.10
(Known as Lindane) Milled foodgrains Nil
Rice grain Unpolished 0.10
Milk 0.01 (on whole
basis)
Milk products 0.20
Milk products (having less 0.20 (on whole
than 2 per cent fat) basis)
118
1 2 3 4

Fish 0.25
Eggs 0.10 (On shell
free basis)
Meat and poultry 2.00 (On Whole
basis)
(d) Delta (δ) Isomer: Rice grain Unpolished 0.10
Milk (whole) 0.02
Fruits & vegetables 1.00
Fish 0.25
22. Malathion (Malathion to be determined Foodgrains 4.0
and expressed as combined residues of Milled foodgrains 1.0
malathion and malaoxon) Fruits 4.0
Vegetables 3.0
Dried fruits 8.0
23. Parathion (Combined residues of Fruits and Vegetables 0.5
parathion and paraoxon to be
determined and expressed as
parathion)
24. Parathion methyl (combined residues Fruits 0.2
of parathion methyl and its oxygen Vegetables 1.0
analogue to be determined and
expressed as parathion methyl)
25. Phosphamidon residues (expressed as Foodgrains 0.05
the sum of phosphamidon and its Milled foodgrains Nil
desethyl derivative) Fruits and Vegetables 0.2
26. Pyrethrins (sum of pyrethrins I & II and Foodgrains Nil
other structurally related insecticide Milled foodgrains Nil
Ingredients of pyrethrum) Fruits and Vegetables 1.0
27. Chlorienvinphos Foodgrains 0.025
(Residues to be measured as alpha Milled Foodgrains 0.006
and beta isomers of Chlorienvinphos) Milk and Milk Products 0.2 (fat basis)
Meat and Poultry 0.2 (carcass fat)
119
1 2 3 4
Vegetables 0.05
Groundnuts 0.05 (shell free
basis)
Cotton seed 0.05
28. Chlorobenzilate Fruits 1.0
Dry Fruits, Almonds and 0.2 (shell free
Walnuts basis)
29. Chlorpyrifos Foodgrains 0.05
Fruits 0.5
Potatoes and Onions 0.01
Cauliflower and Cabbage 0.01
Meat and Poultry 0.1 (carcass fat)
Milk and Milk Products 0.01 (fat basis)
Cotton seed 0.05
Cotton seed oil (crude) 0.025
30. 2,4D Foodgrains 0.01
Potatoes 0.2
*Milk and Milk Products 0.05
*Meat and Poultry 0.05
Eggs 0.05 (shell free
basis)
Fruits 2.0
31. Ethion (Residues to be determined as Tea (dry manufactured) 5.0
ethion and its oxygen analogue and Cucumber and Squash 0.5
expressed as ethion) Other Vegetables 1.0
Cotton seed 0.5
*Milk and Milk Products 0.5 (fat basis)
*Meat and Poultry 0.2 (carcass fat
basis)
basis)
Foodgrains 0.025
Peaches 1.0
Other fruits 2.0
Dry fruits 0.1 (shell free
basis)
120
1 2 3 4
32. Formothion Citrus fruits 0.2

(Determined as dinethoate and its Other fruits 1.0
oxygen Analogue and expressed as Vegetables 2.0
dimethoate except in case of citrus Peppers and Tomatoes 1.0
fruits where it is to be determined
as formothion)
33. Monocrotophos Foodgrains 0.025
Milled Foodgrains 0.006
Citrus fruits 0.2
Other fruits 1.0
Carrot, Turnip, Potatoes 0.05
and Sugar beet
Onion and Peas 0.1
Other Vegetables 0.2
Cotton seed 0.1
Cotton seed oil (raw) 0.05
*Milk and Milk Products 0.02
basis)
Coffee (Raw beans) 0.1
Chillies 0.2
Cardamom 0.5
34. Paraquat Dichloride (Determined as Foodgrains 0.1
Paraquat cations) Milled foodgrains 0.025
Potato 0.2
Cotton seed 0.2
Cotton seed oil 0.05
(edible refined)
*Milk (whole) 0.01
Fruits 0.05
35. Phosalone Pears 2.0
Citrus fruits 1.0
Other fruits 5.0
Potatoes 0.1
Rapeseed/Mustard Oil (crude) 0.05
121
1 2 3 4
36. Trichlorfon Foodgrains 0.05

Sugar beet 0.05
Fruits and Vegetables 0.1
Oil seeds 0.1
Edible Oil (refined) 0.05
*Milk (whole) 0.05
37. Thiometon Foodgrains 0.025
(Residues determined as Milled foodgrains 0.006
thiometon, its sulfoxide Fruits 0.5
and sulphone expressed Potato, Carrots and Sugar 0.05
as thiometon) beets
38. Acephate Safflower seed 2.0
Cotton Seed 2.0
39. Methamido-phos Safflower seed 0.1
(A metabolite of Acephate) Cotton seed 0.1
40. Aldicarb (sum of Aldicarb, its Potato 0.5
sulphoxide and sulphone, expressed as Chewing Tobacco 0.1
Aldicarb)
41. Atrazine Maize Nil
Sugarcane 0.25
42. Carbendazim Foodgrains 0.50
Vegetables 0.50
Mango 2.00
Banana (whole) 1.00
Other fruits 5.00
Cotton seed 0.10
Groundnut 0.10
Sugar beet 0.10
Dry fruits 0.10
basis)
Meat & Poultry 0.10 (Carcass
fat basis)
Milk & Milk Products 0.10 (fat basis)
122
1 2 3 4
43. Benomyl Foodgrains 0.50

Vegetables 0.50
Mango 2.00
Banana (whole) 1.00
Other fruits 5.00
Cotton seed 0.10
Groundnut 0.10
Sugar beet 0.10
Dry fruits 0.10
basis)
Meat & Poultry 0.10 (carcass fat
basis)
44. Captan Fruit & Vegetables 15.00
45. Carbofuran (sum of Foodgrains 0.10
carbofuran and Milled foodgrains 0.03
3-hydroxy carbofuran Fruits & Vegetables 0.10
expressed as carbofuran) Oil seeds 0.10
Sugarcane 0.10
basis)
46. Copper Oxychloride Fruit 20.00
(determined as copper) Potato 1.00
47. Cypermethrin (sum of isomers) Wheat grains 0.05
(fat soluble residue)
Milled wheat grains 0.01
Brinjal 0.20
Cabbage 2.00
Bhindi 0.20
Oil seeds except groundnut 0.20
Meat and Poultry 0.20 (carcass fat
basis)
48. Decamethrin/Deltamethrin Cotton Seed 0.10
Foodgrains 0.50
Milled Foodgrains 0.20
Rice 0.05
123
1 2 3 4
49. Edifenphos Rice 0.02

Rice bran 1.00
basis)
Meat and poultry 0.02 (carcass
fat basis)
Milk and Milk products 0.01( fat basis)
50. Fenthion (sum of fenthion, its oxygen Foodgrains 0.10
analogue and their sulphoxides and Milled foodgrains 0.03
sulphones expressed as fenthion) Onion 0.10
Potatoes 0.05
Beans 0.10
Peas 0.50
Tomatoes 0.50
Musk melon 2.00
Meat and Poultry 2.00 (carcasss
fat basis)
Milk and Milk products 0.05 (fat basis)
51. Fenvalerate (fat soluble residue) Cauliflower 2.00
Brinjal '2.00
Okra 2.00
Cotton Seed 0.20
Cotton Seed oil 0.10
Meat and Poultry 1.00 (carcass fat
basis)
52. Dithiocarbamates (the residue tolerance Foodgrains 0.20
limit are determined and expressed as Milled foodgrains 0.05
mg/CS2/kg and refer separately to the Potatoes 0.10
residues arising from any or each group
of dithiocarbamates
(a) Dimethyl dithiocarbamates residue Tomatoes 3.00
resulting from the use of ferbam or
ziram, and
(b) Ethylene bis-dithiocarbamates Cherries 1.00
resulting from the use of mancozeb, Other fruits 3.00
maneb or zineb (including zineb
derived from nabam plus zinc
sulphate)
(c) Mancozeb Chillies 1.0
124
1 2 3 4
53. Phenthoate Foodgrains 0.05

Oilseeds 0.03
Edible oils 0.01
basis)
basis)
Milk & Milk products 0.01 (fat basis)
54. Phorate (sum of Phorate, its Foodgrains 0.05
oxygen analogue and their sulphoxides Milled foodgrains 0.01
and sulphones,expressed as phorate) Tomatoes 0.10
Fruits 0.05
Oil seeds 0.05
Edible oils 0.03
Sugarcane 0.05
basis)
Meat & Poultry 0.05 (carcass
fat basis)
55. Simazine Maize Nil
Sugarcane 0.25
56. Pirimiphos-methyl Rice 0.50
Food grains except Rice 5.00
Milled food grains except rice 1.00
basis)
basis)
57. Alachlor Cotton Seed 0.05
Groundnut 0.05
Maize 0.10
Soyabeans 0.10
58. Alfa Nephthyl Acetic Acid (A.N.A.) Pine-Apple 0.50
59. Bitertanol Wheat 0.05
Groundnut 0.10
125
1 2 3 4
60. Captafol Tomato 5.00

61. Cartaphydrochloride Rice 0.50
62. Chlormequatchloride Grape 1.00
Cotton Seed 1.00
63. Chlorothalonil Groundnut 0.10
Potato 0.10
64. Diflubenzuron Cotton Seed 0.20
65. Dodine Apple 5.00
66. Diuron Cotton Seed 1.00
Banana 0.10
Maize 0.50
Citrus 1.00
(Sweet Orange)
Grapes 1.00
67. Ethephon Pine Apple 2.00
Coffee 0.10
Tomato 2.00
Mango 2.00
68. Fluchloralin Cotton Seed 0.05
Soyabeans 0.05
69. Malic Hydrazide Onion 15.00
Potato 50.00
70. Metalyxyl Bajra 0.05
Maize 0.05
Sorghum 0.05
71. Methomyl Cotton Seed 0.10
72. Methyl Chloro-Phenoxy-Acetic Acid Rice 0.05
(M.C.P.A.) Wheat 0.05
73. Oxadiazon Rice 0.03
74. Oxydemeton methyl Foodgrains 0.02
75. Permethrin Cucumber 0.50
Cotton Seed 0.50
Soyabeans 0.05
Sunflower Seed 1.00
126
1 2 3 4
76. Quinolphos Rice 0.01

Pigeon pea 0.01
Cardamom 0.01
Tea 0.01
Fish 0.01
Chillies 0.2
77. Thiophenatemethyl Apple 5.00
Papaya 7.00
78. Triazophos Chillies 0.2
Rice 0.05
Cotton seed oil 0.1
Soyabean oil 0.05
79. Profenofos Cotton seed oil 0.05
80. Fenpropathrin Cotton seed oil 0.05
81. Fenarimol Apple 5.0
82. Hexaconazole Apple 0.1
83. Iprodione Rape seed 0.5
Mustard seed 0.5
Rice 10.0
Tomato 5.0
Grapes 10.0
84. Tridemoiph Wheat 0.1
Grapes 0.5
Mango 0.05
85. Penconazole Grapes 0.2
86. Propiconazole Wheat 0.05
87. Myclobutanil Groundnut seed 0.1
Grapes 1.0
88. Sulfosulfuron Wheat 0.02
89. Trifluralin Wheat 0.05
90. Ethoxysulfuron Rice 0.01
91. Metolachlor Soyabean Oil 0.05
92. Glyphosphate Tea 1.0
93. Linuron Pea 0.05
127
1 2 3 4
94. Oxyfluorfen Rice 0.05

Groundnut Oil 0.05
95. Carbosulfan Rice 0.2
96. Tricyclazole Rice 0.02
97. Imidacloprid Cotton seed Oil 0.05
Rice 0.05
98. Butachlor Rice 0.05
99. Chlorimuron-ethyl Wheat 0.05
100. Diclofop-methyl Wheat 0.1
101. Metribuzin Soyabean Oil 0.1
102. Lambdacyhalothrin Cotton seed Oil 0.05
103. Fenazaquin Tea 3.0
104. Pendimethalin Wheat 0.05
Rice 0.05
Soyabean Oil 0.05
Cotton seed Oil 0.05
105. Pretilachlor Rice 0.05
106. Fluvalinate Cotton seed Oil 0.05
107. Metasulfuron-mefhyl Wheat 0.1
108. Methabenzthiazuron Wheat 0.5
109. Imazethapyr Soyabean oil 0.1
Groundnut oil 0.1
110. Cyhalofop-butyl Rice 0.5
111. Triallate Wheat 0.05
112. Spinosad Cotton seed oil 0.02
Cabbage 0.02
Cauliflower 0.02
113. Thiamethoxam Rice 0.02
114. Fenobucarb Rice 0.01
115. Thiodicarb Cotton seed oil 0.02
116. Anilophos Rice 0.1
128
1 2 3 4
117. Fenoxy-prop-p-ethyl Wheat 0.02

Soyabean seed 0.02
118. Glufosinate-ammonium Tea 0.01
119. Clodinafop-propanyl Wheat 0.1
120. Dithianon Apple 0.1
121. Kitazin Rice 02
122. Isoprothiolane Rice 0.1
123. Acetamiprid Cotton seed oil 0.1
124. Cymoxanil Grapes 0.1
125. Triadimefon Wheat 0.5
Pea 0.1
Grapes 2.0
126. Fosetyl-A1 Grapes 1.0
Cardamom 0.2
127. Isoproturon Wheat 0.1
128. Propargite Tea 10.0
129. Difenoconazole Apple 0.01
130. b-Cyfluthrin Cotton seed 0.02
131. Ethofenprox Rice 0.01
132. Bifenthrin Cotton seed 0.05
133. Benfuracarb Red Gram 0.05
Rice 0.05
134. Quizalofop-ethyl Soyabean seed 0.05
135. Flufenacet Rice 0.05
136. Buprofezin Rice 0.05
137. Dimethomorph Grapes 0.05
Potatoes 0.05
138. Chlorfenopyr Cabbage 0.05
139. Indoxacarb Cotton seed 0.1
Cotton seed oil 0.1
Cabbage 0.1
129
1 2 3 4
140. Metiram Tomato 5.0

Ground nut seed 0.1
Ground nut seed oil 0.1
141. Lufenuron Cabbage 0.3
142. Carpropamid Rice 1.0
143. Novaluron Cotton seed 0.01
Tomato 0.01
Cabbage 0.01
144. Oxadiargyl Rice 0.1
145. Pyrazosulfuron ethyl Rice 0.01
146. Clomazone Rice 0.01
Soyabean seed 0.01
Soyabean seed oil 0.01
147. Tebuconazole Wheat 0.05
148. Propineb Apple 1.0
Pomegranate 0.5
Potato 0.5
Green Chillies 2.0
Grapes 0.5
149. Thiochlorprid Cotton seed 0.05
Rice 0.01
*Soluble in water, hence not necessary to mention on fat basis
Explanation:—For the purpose of this regulation:

(a) the expression “insecticide” shall have the meaning assigned
to it in the Insecticide Act, 1968 (46 of 1968);
(b) unless otherwise stated:
(i) maximum levels are expressed in mg./kg. on a whole
product basis.
(ii) all foods refer to raw agricultural products moving in
commerce.
2.3.2: ANTIBIOTIC AND OTHER PHARMA-COLOGICALLY ACTIVE
SUBSTANCES
(1) The amount of antibiotic mentioned in column (2), on the sea

foods including shrimps, prawns or any other variety of fish and fishery
130
products, shall not exceed the tolerance limit prescribed in column (3)
of the table given below:—
Sl.No. Name of Antibiotics Tolerance limit mg./kg. (ppm)
1. Tetracycline 0.1
2. Oxytetracycline 0.1
3. Trimethoprim 0.05
4. Oxolinic acid 0.3
(2) The use of any of the following antibiotics and other

Pharmacologically Active Substances shall be prohibited in any unit
processing sea foods including shrimps, prawns or any other variety of
fish and fishery products:—
(i) All Nitrofurans including

(ii) Furaltadone
(iii) Furazolidone
(iv) Furylfuramide
(v) Nifuratel
(vi) Nifuroxime
(vii) Nifurprazine
(viii) Nitrofumatoin
(ix) Nitrofurazone
(x) Chloramphenicol
(xi) Neomycin
(xii) Nalidixic acid
(xiii) Sulphamethoxazole
(xiv) Aristolochia spp and preparations thereof
(xv) Chloroform
(xvi) Chloropromazine
(xvii) Cholchicine
(xviii) Dapsone
(xix) Dimetridazole
(xx) Metronidazole
131
(xxi) Ronidazole
(xxii) Ipronidazole
(xxiii) Other nitromidazoles
(xxiv) Clenbuterol
(xxv) Diethylstibestrol (DES)
(xxvi) Sulfanoamide drugs (except approved Sulfadimethoxine,
Sulfabromomethazine and Sulfaethoxypyridazine)
(xxvii) Fluoroquinolones
(xxviii) Glycopeptides.
[F.No. 2-15015/30/2010]
V.N.GAUR,
Chief Executive Officer
132
ANNEXURE VI
NIOH STUDIES
Sl.No Title Target Matrix No. of Chemicals Range of the References

population samples measured concentration
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Organochlorine pesticides Cancer cases Serum Total = 33 (1) α-HCH (1) 1.2-3.81 ng/ml NIOH Annual
residues in serum samples Subject (N=33) (2) β-HCH (2) 1.1-4.57 ng/ml report 2008-09,
from cancer patients of (3) γ-HCH (3) 1.25-10.16 ng/ml Page No. 82
north-east region (4) δ-HCH (4) 2.0-9.11 ng/ml
(5) α-Endosulfan (5) 1.32-5.78 ng/ml
(6) β-Endosulfan (6) 1.01-3.72 ng/ml
(7) Endosulfan Sulphate (7) 2.17-7.78 ng/ml
(8) op’-DDE (8) 1.01-2.47 ng/ml
(9) pp’-DDE (9) 1.23-105.80 ng/ml
(10) op-DDD (10) 2.97-20.81 ng/ml
(11) pp-DDD (11) 1.17-3.52 ne/ml
(12) op-DDT (12) ND
(13) pp-DDT (13) 1.07-41.05 ng/ml
(14) Dicofol (14) 1.23-7.83 ng/ml
(15) Chlorpyriphos (15) 1.24-1.50
2. Assessment of Human Exposure General Blood Total (N=150) PCB congeners Urban (0.1 -32.24 ng/ml) NIOH Annual report
to PCBs Through Biological Population Urban (N=70) Rural (0.15-13.3 ng/ml) 2007-08, Page No. 78
Monitoring Rural (N=80)
133
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
134
3. Cancer in North-East India- NHL & Breast Serum Total (N =201) Organochlorine Pesticides NIOH Annual report
Understanding the Role of Cancer (1) α-HCH (1) — 2007-08, Page No. 81
Pesticides (2) β-HCH (2) 1.19- 7.97 ng/ml
(3) γ-HCH (3) 1.12-3.65 ng/ml
(4) δ-HCH (4) 1.12 ng/ml
(5) α-Endosulfan (5) 1.1 ng/ml
(6) β-Endosulfan (6) 1.1 ng/ml
(7) Endosulfan Sulphate (7) —
(8) op’-DDE (8) —
(9) pp’-DDE (9) 8-114.68 ng/ml
(10) op-DDD (10) —
(11) pp-DDD (11) —
(12) op-DDT (12) —
(13) pp-DDT (13) 3.48-54.13 ng/ml
(14) Dicofol (14) —
4. Mass monocrotophos poisoning Monocrotophos No. of Sample Monocrotophos Cholinesterase estimation NIOH Annual report
with high morbidity poison Case (N = 8) 2 family 2006-07
members
5. Mass organophosphate (Ethion)- Ethion poison Blood (N=25) Ethion 1.3 mg/L (after 24 hr NIOH Annual report
poisoning with high mortality Cases exposure) 2005-06 Page No. 15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
6. Environmental impact assessment General Blood (Total N= 101) ∑BHC 0.26-15.29 ng/ml NIOH Annual report
study near UCIL, Bhopal due to Population ∑DDT 5.57-85.32 ng/ml 2005-06 Page No. 31
allegedly improper disposal of Mercury 0.2-1.2 ug/l
toxic waste - A pilot study
7. Chlorpyrifos toxicokinetics in Chlorpyrifos Blood Total (N= 24) Chlorpyrifos 0.3-3.7 ppm NIOH Annual report
acute poisoning cases acute poisoning 2005-06 Page No. 46
Cases
8. Cholinesterase and paraoxonase Organophosphate Serum Total (N= 117) Chlorpyrifos Cholinesterase estimation NIOH Annual report
patterns in organophosphate pesticide (OP) Control (N=59) Monocrotophos 2004-05 Page No. 18
pesticide (OP) poisoning poisoning cases Subject (N=58) Phorate Dimethoate
9. Levels of organochlorine General Serum Total (N=18) Organochlorine Pesticides NIOH Annual report
pesticide residues in human Population (1) α-HCH 1.0-9.16 µg/L 2003-04 Page No. 33
blood in Ahmedabad (2) β-HCH 20.11-82.09 µg/L
(3) γ-HCH 0.72-3.09 µg/L
(5) pp-DDE 10.43-38.33 µg/L
(10) pp-DDD 0.77-4.43 µg/L
(12) op-DDT 0.42-2.41 µg/L
(13) pp-DDT 3.66-24.06 µg/L
10. Environmental epidemiology School Children Blood Total (N=1035) Endosulfan 1-78.74 ppb NIOH Annual report
study related to aerial spray Subject (N=619) 2001-02 Page No. 2
of endosulfan on cashew nut Control (N=416)
plantation in Kasargod district
of North Kerala
135
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
136
11. Biological monitoring of workers Cypermethrin Serum Total (N=28) Cypermethrin 0.055-1.63 ppm NIOH Annual report
engaged in manufacture of Manufacture Control (N=8) 1998-1999
cypermethrin - A synthetic Exposed (N=20) Page No. 18
pyrethroid
12. Serum residue levels of Pesticide Serum Total (N=39) Organochlorine Pesticides <40 NIOH Annual report
persistent organochlorine formulators Control (N=14) Total-HCH 1997-1998
compounds in pesticide Total-DDT
formulators Study (N=25)
13. Studies on pesticide formulators Pesticide Serum Total (N=40) Endosulfan, Quinalphos, Cholinesterase estimation NIOH Annual report
formulators Control (N=10) Chlorpyriphos, and other enzymes 1997-1998
Study (N=30) Monocrotophos, BHC Page No. 4
and parathion.
14. Clinical and biochemical HCH Serum Total (N=502) (1) α-HCH ND-0.026 ppm NIOH Annual report
investigations in workers manufacture Control (N=146) (2) β-HCH 0.1-0.081 ppm 1992-1993,
involved in the manufacture Study (N=356) (3) γ-HCH ND-008 ppm Page No. 21
of HCH (Hexachlorocy- (4) δ-HCH ND-002 ppm
clohexane) Study (N=356) (1) α-HCH 0.003-0.893 ppm
(2) β-HCH 0.01-0.547 ppm
(3) γ-HCH ND-0.32 ppm
(4) δ-HCH ND-0.16 ppm
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
15. Health monitoring of Organophosphate Plasma Total (N=235) Phosalone Cholinesterase estimation NIOH Annual report
workers manufacturing and insecticides Control (N=69) Ethion and other enzymes 1991-1992
formulating Organophosphate manufacturer Study (N=166) Phorate estimation Page No. 35
insecticides
16. Immunological profile in workers Pesticides Serum Total (N=89) Malathion Assed immunological NIOH Annual report
exposed to pesticides manufacturer Control (N=18) Cyfluthrin parameter 1991-1992
Study (N=71) DDT (IgG, igA and CRP) Page No. 47
17. Residues of Organochlorine General Serum Total (N=31) DDT 103-164 µg/L NIOH Annual report
insecticides in human blood Population HCH 34.663-231.47 µg/L 1991-1992
samples in Ahmedabad HeptaChlor ND-1.936 µg/L Page No. 52
(Rural) area Oxychlordane 0.672-2.52 µg/L
Aldrin ND-0.813 µg/L
Dieldrin ND-3.730 µg/L
18. Health effects among workers BHC Workers Serum Total (N=175) (1) α-BHC 0.01-0.038 ppm NIOH Annual report
engaged in the manufacture Control (N=58) (2) β-BHC 0.0128-0.220 ppm 1986-1987
of BHC (3) γ-BHC ND-0.018 ppm Page No. 87
(4) δ-BHC ND-0.006 ppm
Study (N=117) (1) α-BHC 0.24-0.738 ppm
(2) β-BHC 0.021-0.6565 ppm
(3) γ-BHC 0.003-0.050 ppm
137
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
138
19. Health hazards among workers BHC Serum Total (N=79) (1) α-BHC ND-0.26 ppm NIOH Annual report
involved in manufacture of Manufacturer Control (N=14) (2) β-BHC ND-0.1 ppm 1983-84 Page
BHC (Part-II) (3) γ-BHC ND-0.01 ppm No. 146
(4) δ-BHC —
Study (N= 65) (1) α-BHC 0.004-0.104 ppm
(2) β-BHC 0.02 -0.20 ppm
(3) γ-BHC ND-0.040 ppm
20. Health hazards in pesticide Pesticide Blood Total (N=39) Phorate Cholinesterase estimation NIOH Annual report
formulators exposed to (Phorate) (Organophosphate) and other enzymes 1980-81
Phorate-An Organophosphate Formulators estimation Page No. 49
insecticide
21. Short and long term effects of Malaria Serum Total (N=231) BHC Control (0.078 ± 0.062) ppm NIOH Annual report
BHC (Hexachlorocyclohexane) Spraymen Control (N=60) Study (0.10 ±0.212) ppm 1975-76 Page No. 1
on Malaria Spraymen in Study (N=171)
Gujarat State.
22. “Short and long term Effects of BHC and DDT Serum Total (N= 246) BHC Control (0.177± 0.154) ppm NIOH Annual report
BHC on NMEP spraymen in spraymen Control (N=46) Study (0.286 ± 0.265) ppm 1974-75 Page No. 1
Gujarat State” Study (N=200)
Total (N= 246) pp-DDT Control (0.028-0.14) ppm
Control (N=46) Study (0.002-0.59) ppm
Study (N=200)
Total (N= 246) pp-DDE Control (0.075-0.59) ppm
Control (N=46) Study (0.005-0.81) ppm
Study (N=200)
ANNEXURE VII
INSECTICIDES REFUSED FOR REGISTRATION BY THE REGISTRATION

COMMITTEE
Sl. No. Name of Insecticides
1. Ammonium Sulphamate
2. Azinphos Ethyl
3. Azinphos Methyl
4. Binapacryl
5. Calcium Arsenate
6. Carbophenothion
7. Chinomethionate (Morestan)
8. Dicrotophos
9. EPN
10. Fentin Acetate
11. Fentin Hydroxide
12. Lead Arsenate
13. Leptophos (Phosvel)
14. Mephosfolan
15. Mevinphos (Phosdrin)
16. 2,4, 5-T
17. Thiodemeton/Disulfoton
18. Vamidothion
139
ANNEXURE VIII
INSECTICIDES/INSECTICIDES FORMULATIONS BANNED IN INDIA
A. Insecticides Banned for manufacture, import and use:
1. Aldicarb
2. Aldrin
3. Benzene Hexachloride
4. Calcium Cyanide
5. Chlorbenzilate
6. Chlordane
7. Chlorofenvinphos
8. Copper Acetoarsenite
9. Dibromochloropropane
10. Dieldrin
11. Endrin
12. Ethyl Mercury Chloride
13. Ethyl Parathion
14. Ethylene Dibromide
15. Heptachlor
16. Lindane (Gamma-HCH)
17. Maleic Hydrazide
18. Menazon
19. Metoxuron
20. Nitrofen
21. Paraquat Dimethyl Sulphate
22. Pentachloro Nitrobenzene
23. Pentachlorophenol
24. Phenyl Mercury Acetate
25. Sodium Methane Arsonate
140
26. TCA (Trichloro acetic acid)
27. Tetradifon
28. Toxaphene (Camphechlor)
B. Insecticides formulations banned for import, manufacture and use
1. Carbofuron 50% SP
2. Methomyl 12.5% L
3. Methomyl 24% formulation
4. Phosphamidon 85% SL
C. Insecticides/Insecticides Formulations banned for use but

continued to manufacture for export
1. Captafol 80% Powder

2. Nicotin Sulfate
D. Insecticides Withdrawn
1. Dalapon
2. Ferbam
3. Formothion
4. Nickel Chloride
5. Paradichlorobenzene (PDCB)
6. Simazine
7. Warfarin
141
ANNEXURE IX
INSECTICIDES RESTRICTED FOR USE IN THE COUNTRY
Sl. Name of Insecticides Details of Restrictions

No.
1 2 3
1. Aluminium Phosphide The Pest Control Operations with Aluminum

Phosphide may be undertaken only by
Government Organizations/Pest Control
Operators under the strict supervision of
Government Experts except Aluminium
Phosphide 15% 12 gram tablet and Aluminum
Phosphide 6% tablet. The production,
marketing and use of Aluminium Phosphide
tube packs with a capacity of 10 and 20
tablets of 3 gram each of Aluminium
Phosphide are banned completely.
2. Captafol The use of Captafol as foliar spray is
banned. Captafol shall be used only as seed
dresser. The manufacture of Captafol 80%
powder for dry seed treatment (DS) is
banned for use in the country except
manufacture for export.
3. Cypermethrin Cypermethrin 3% Smoke Generator, is to be
used only through Pest Control Operators
and not allowed to be used by the General
Public.
4. Dazomet The use of Dazomet is not permitted on
Tea.
5. Diazinon Diazinon is banned for use in agriculture
except for household use.
6. Dichloro Diphenyl The use of DDT for the domestic Public
Trichloroethane (DDT) Health Programme is restricted up to 10,000
Metric Tonnes per annum, except in case of
any major outbreak of epidemic. Use of
DDT in Agriculture is withdrawn
142
1 2 3
7. Fenitrothion The use of Fenitrothion is banned in

Agriculture except for locust control in
scheduled desert area and public health.
8. Fenthion The use of Fenthion is banned in Agriculture
except for locust control, household and
public health.
9. Methoxy Ethyl The use of MEMC is banned completely
Mercuric Chloride except for seed treatment of potato and
(MEMC) sugarcane.
10. Methyl Bromide Methyl Bromide may be used only by
Government/Government undertakings/
Government Organizations/Pest control
operators under the strict supervision of
Government. Experts or Experts whose
expertise is approved by the Plant
Protection Advisor to Government of India.
11. Methyl Parathion Methyl Parathion 50% EC and 2% DP
formulations are banned for use on fruits
and vegetables.
The use of Methyl Parathion is permitted
only on those crops approved by the
Registration Committee where honeybees
are not acting as a pollinators.
12. Monocrotophos Monocrotophos is banned for use on
vegetables.
13. Sodium Cyanide The use of Sodium Cyanide shall be
restricted for Fumigation of Cotton bales
under expert supervision approved by the
Plant Protection Advisor to Government of
India.
143
ANNEXURE X
LIST OF PESTICIDES/FORMULATIONS WHICH ARE BANNED
(As on 1st January 2014)
Pesticides Banned for manufacture, Import & Use
Sl.No. Description
1 2
1. Aldicarb
2. Aldrin
3. Benzene Hexachloride
4. Calcium Cyanide
5. Chlorbenzilate
6. Chlordane
7. Chlorofenvinphos
8. Copper Acetoarsenite
9. Dibromochloropropane
10. Dieldrin
11. Endrin
12. Ethyl Mercury Chloride
13. Ethyl Parathion
14. Ethylene Dibromide
15. Heptachlor
16. Lindane (Gamma-HCH)
17. Maleic Hydrazide
18. Menazon
19. Metoxuron
20. Nitrofen
21. Paraquat Dimethyl Sulphate
144
1 2
22. Pentachloro Nitrobenzene

23. Pentachlorophenol
24. Phenyl Mercury Acetate
25. Sodium Methane Arsonate
26. TCA (Trichloro acetic acid)
27. Tetradifon
28. Toxaphene (Camphechlor)
Pesticide formulations banned for import, manufacture and use
1. Carbofuron 50% SP
2. Methomyl 12.5% L
3. Methomyl 24% formulation
4. Phosphamidon 85% SL
Pesticide/Pesticide formulations banned for use but continued to

manufacture for export
1. Captafol 80% Powder

2. Nicotin Sulfate
145
APPENDIX I

(2014-15)
MINUTES OF THE TENTH SITTING OF THE COMMITTEE
The Committee sat on Wednesday, the 10th December, 2014 from

1500 hrs. to 1700 hrs. in Committee Room ‘B’ Parliament House Annexe,
New Delhi.
PRESENT
MEMBERS
Lok Sabha

7. Dr. Tapas Mandal
12. Shri C.L. Ruala
Rajya Sabha
146
SECRETARIAT
1. Shri Abhijit Kumar — Joint Secretary
2. Smt. Abha Singh Yaduvanshi — Director
3. Shri C. Vanlalruata — Deputy Secretary
2. At the outset the Chairperson welcomed the members to the

Sitting of the Committee. The Committee, then, took up the draft
Reports on the examination of Demands for Grants (2014-15) the Ministry
of Agriculture (i) Department of Agricultural Research and Education
and (ii) Department of Agriculture and Cooperation. After some
deliberations, the Committee adopted the draft Reports without any
modification and authorized the Chairperson to finalise the reports on
the basis of factual verification from the concerned Departments and
present the same to Parliament.
3. Thereafter, representatives of the Ministry of Agriculture

(Department of Agricultural Research and Education), were ushered
and the following were present:—
WITNESSES
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE
(DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CO-OPERATION)
1. Dr. S. Ayyappan Secretary (DARE) & DG (ICAR)

2. Shri R. Rajagopal Additional Secretary (DARE) &
Secretary (ICAR)
3. Dr. Swapan K. Datta DDG (CS)
4. Dr. A.K. Sikka DDG (NRM)
5. Dr. Suresh Kumar Chaudhari ADG (S&WM)
6. Dr. P.K. Chakrabarty ADG (PP&B)
7. Dr. Ashok K. Patra Director (IISS, Bhopal)
4. The Chairperson welcomed the representatives of Ministry of

Agriculture (Department of Agricultural Research and Education) for
appearing before the Committee in connection with the examination of
‘Impact of Chemical Fertilizers and Pesticides on Agriculture and Allied
Sectors in the Country’ and apprised them of the provisions of Directions
55(1) and 58 of the Directions by Speaker regarding confidentiality of
the proceedings of the Committee and asked them to introduce
themselves. Thereafter, the representatives of Ministry made power
point presentation and highlighted their programmes and achievements.
147
5. The Members raised queries and sought clarification on various
issues including surveillance system for banned/spurious pesticides sold
by companies, role of Krishi Vigyan Kendras for creating awareness and
training of farmers regarding optimum use of fertilizers and pesticides
and use of bio-fertilizer/bio-pesticide, status of preparation of soil
fertility map according to agro-climatic zones, steps taken for promotion
of bio-fertilizers, research and development on traditional agricultural
practices for pest management, subsidy being provided for promotion
of bio-fertilizers, need of prescription to be given by agricultural
scientists and tailor-made doses for sale of fertilizers/pesticides,
development of advanced seed varieties obviating need of fertilizers
and pesticides, policy of Government regarding imposing ban on harmful
pesticides etc. The representatives of the Ministry responded to the
same. Thereafter, the Chairperson thanked the representatives for
appearing before the Committee. The Committee directed the
representatives of the Ministry to furnish written replies to the queries
which could not be responded to readily by them.
A verbatim record of the proceedings has been kept separately.
The Committee then adjourned.
148
APPENDIX II

(2014-15)
MINUTES OF THE ELEVENTH SITTING OF THE COMMITTEE
The Committee sat on Tuesday, the 16th December, 2014 from

1500 hrs. to 1700 hrs. in Committee Room 'B' Parliament House Annexe,
New Delhi.
PRESENT
MEMBERS
Lok Sabha

6. Dr. Tapas Mandal
10. Shri C.L. Ruala
13. Shri Kadiyam Srihari
Rajya Sabha

149
SECRETARIAT
1. Shri Abhijit Kumar — Joint Secretary
3. Smt. Juby Amar — Deputy Secretary
2. *** *** ***
3. Thereafter, representatives of the Ministry of Agriculture

(Department of Agricultural and Cooperation), were ushered and the
following were present:—
WITNESSES
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE

(DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, CO-OPERATION AND FARMERS
WELFARE)
1. Shri Ashish Bahuguna Secretary

2. Shri A.K. Srivastava Additional Secretary
3. Shri U.K. Singh Joint Secretary
4. Smt I. Rani Kumudini Joint Secretary
DEPARTMENT OF FERTILIZERS
Shri H.L. Samariya Joint Secretary
INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH (ICAR)
Dr. P.P. Biswas Pr. Scientist
AGRICULTURAL & PROCESSED FOOD PRODUCT EXPORT DEVELOPMENT

AUTHORITY (APEDA)
Dr. PVSM Gouri Advisor
4. The Chairperson welcomed the representatives of Ministry of

Agriculture (Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers
Welfare), Department of Fertilisers, Indian Council of Agricultural
Research (ICAR) and Agricultural & Processed Food Product Export
Development Authority (APEDA) for appearing before the Committee in
connection with the examination of ‘Impact of Chemical Fertilizers and
Pesticides on Agriculture and Allied Sectors in the Country’ and apprised
them of the provisions of Directions 55(1) and 58 of the Directions by
150
Speaker regarding confidentiality of the proceedings of the Committee
and asked them to introduce themselves.
5. The Members raised queries and sought clarification on various

issues including efforts made by the Department to ensure availability
of soil health card to all farmers as announced in the budget (2014-15),
cases of manufacturing/import/sale of banned/spurious pesticides by
companies and action taken by the Department in this regard, policy
of Government regarding imposing ban on harmful pesticides, subsidy
being provided for promotion of liquid and bio-fertilizers, steps taken
for education, awareness and training of farmers regarding optimum
use of fertilizers and pesticides and use of bio-fertilizer/bio-pesticide,
research and development on traditional agricultural practices for pest
management etc. The representatives of the Ministry responded to the
same. Thereafter, the Chairperson thanked the representatives for
appearing before the Committee. The Committee directed the
***Not related to the subject.
151
APPENDIX III

(2014-15)
MINUTES OF THE THIRTEENTH SITTING OF THE COMMITTEE
The Committee sat on Monday, the 5th January, 2015 from

1100 hrs. to 1245 hrs. in Committee Room ‘D’ Parliament House Annexe,
New Delhi.
PRESENT
MEMBERS
Lok Sabha
2. Dr. Tapas Mandal

6. Shri C.L. Ruala
Rajya Sabha

SECRETARIAT
152
WITNESSES
MINISTRY OF CHEMICALS & FERTILIZERS

(DEPARTMENT OF FERTILIZERS)
1. Shri Jugal Kishore Mohapatra Secretary

2. Shri Sushil Kumar Lohani Joint Secretary
3. Shri Heera Lal Sawariya Joint Secretary
4. Shri Sham Lal Goyal Joint Secretary
5. Shri K.M. Gupta Economic Advisor
MINISTRY OF CHEMICALS & FERTILIZERS

(DEPARTMENT OF CHEMICALS & PETROCHEMICALS)
1. Shri Surjit K. Chaudhary Secretary

2. Dr. A.J.V. Prasad Joint Secretary
3. Shri K. Hari Kumar CMD (HIL)
2. At the outset, the Chairman welcomed the Members of the

Committee and the representatives of the Ministry of Chemicals &
Fertilizers (Department of Chemicals & Petrochemicals & Department
of Fertilizers) and other officials to the Sitting and apprised the witnesses
of the provisions of the Directions 55(1) and 58 ofthe Directions by the
Speaker.
3. Thereafter, the Members sought clarifications on various issues

relating to the Subject ‘Impact of Chemical Fertilizers & Pesticides on
Agriculture and Allied Sectors in the Country’ such as effect of subsidy
policy on indiscriminate use of Urea, pattern of use of chemical fertilizers
in the country, proposal for providing subsidy to bio-fertilizers, liquid
fertilizers and organic manure, steps taken to stop import and
manufacturing of spurious and banned pesticides etc. The representatives
of the Ministry responded to the same. The Committee, directed the
153
APPENDIX IV

(2014-15)
MINUTES OF THE THIRTY THIRD SITTING OF THE COMMITTEE
The Committee met on Wednesday, the 26th August, 2015 from

1100 hrs. to 1300 hrs. in Room No. ‘62’, Parliament House, New Delhi.
PRESENT
MEMBERS
Lok Sabha
2. Prof. Richard Hay

3. Dr. Tapas Mandal
5. Shri Ajay Nishad
10. Shri C.L Ruala
Rajya Sabha

154
SECRETARIAT
1. Shri N.K. Pandey — Director

WITNESSES
MINISTRY OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE

(DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH RESEARCH)
1. Dr. Soumya Swaminathan Secretary (DHR)

2. Shri R.P. Meena Joint Secretary
3. Dr. R.S. Dhaliwal Scientist, ICMR
4. Shri Sanjeev Chadha Director
2. At the outset, the Chairperson welcomed the Members of the

Committee to the Sitting convened for examination of the Subject
‘Impact of Chemical Fertilizers and Pesticides on Agriculture & Allied
Sectors in the Country’. Then, representatives of Ministry of Health &
Family Welfare (Department of Health Research) were ushered in. After
welcoming the representatives to the Sitting, the Chairperson apprised
them of the provisions of the directions 55 (1) and 58 of the ‘Directions
by the Speaker, Lok Sabha’ regarding confidentiality of the proceedings.
3. After the witnesses introduced themselves, the Chairperson raised

many issues such as research done by the ICMR on effects of improper
use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides on human health; comment
of the Committee on research done by the Centre for Science and
Environment regarding high amount of pesticides found in blood samples
of local population in some districts of Punjab and suggestions furnished
by the Department of Health Research regarding fifty-seven pesticides
which have been identified as carcinogenic by the International Cancer
Research Agency. Thereafter, representative of Department of Health
Research made power point presentation on the issue. Then, Members
of the Committee raised various issues related to the subject such as
reasons for less number of studies by the ICMR on the issue of effect
of improper use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides on human health
155
and role of Department of Health Research for study on effects of
pesticides/chemical fertilizers on human health before these are released
in the market for sale.
4. The representatives of the Ministry responded to some of the

queries raised by the Members during the Sitting. The Chairperson
directed the representatives of the Ministry to furnish written replies
to the Committee Secretariat regarding queries which could not be
responded readily by them.
156
APPENDIX V

(2015-16)
EXTRACTS OF MINUTES OF THE TWENTY-NINTH SITTING OF THE

COMMITTEE
The Committee sat on Monday, the 08th August, 2016 from

1000 hrs. to 1100 hrs. in Room No. ‘138’, Chairperson’s Chamber,
Parliament House, New Delhi.
PRESENT
MEMBERS
Lok Sabha
2. Shri Sanganna Karadi

4. Smt. Raksha Nikhil Khadse
7. Shri Ajay Nishad
10. Shri Satyapal Singh (Sambhal)
Rajya Sabha

14. Shri Meghraj Jain
157
SECRETARIAT
1. Shri U.B.S. Negi — Joint Secretary

2. Shri Arun K. Kaushik — Director
4. Shri C. Vanlalruata — Deputy Secretary
2. At the outset, the Chairperson welcomed the members to the

Sitting of the Committee. The Committee, then, took up the following
draft Reports for consideration:—
*(i) **** **** **** **** ****

*(ii) **** **** **** **** ****
(iii) Twenty Ninth Report on the Subject “Impact of Chemical
Fertilisers and Pesticides on Agriculture and Allied Sectors in
the Country” of the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers
Welfare (Department of Agricultural Research and Education);
*(iv) **** **** **** **** ****
3. After some deliberations, the Committee adopted the draft

Reports without any modification and authorized the Chairperson to
finalise the Reports on the basis of factual verification from the
concerned Ministry/Department and present the same to Parliament.
*Matter not related to this Report.
158

16 - Agriculture - 29 Fertiliser

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

16 - Agriculture - 29 Fertiliser

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TWENTY-NINTH REPORT

STANDING COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

(SIXTEENTH LOK SABHA)

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE

IMPACT OF CHEMICAL FERTILIZERS AND PESTICIDES ON

Presented to Lok Sabha on 11.08.2016

LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT

© 2016 BY LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT

COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE (2014-2015) ............................. (v)

Soil Health Card Scheme ................................ 31

Shri Hukm Deo Narayan Yadav — Chairperson

2. Shri Sanganna Amarappa

*Nominated as a Member of Committee on Agriculture vide Lok Sabha Bulletin Part-II

22. Shri A.W. Rabi Bernard

Shri Hukm Deo Narayan Yadav — Chairperson

2. Prof. Ravindra Vishwanath Gaikwad

1. Shri U.B.S. Negi — Joint Secretary

I, the Chairperson, Standing Committee on Agriculture (2015-2016)

NEW DELHI; HUKM DEO NARAYAN YADAV,

1.1 Ever since invention, agriculture has been the mainstay of

1.2 Our country is bestowed with diverse Agro-climatic resources

1.3 However, this stupendous growth in agriculture was not without

Green Revolution Impact on Agricultural Growth in India

1.4 Strategy of Green Revolution was based upon seed-fertilizer-

1.5 Strategy of Green Revolution adopted in our country since

1.6 While analysing impact of use of fertilizers on agricultural

State-wise decadal growth rate in foodgrain production

State 1960- 1971- 1981- 1991- 2001-

Andhra Pradesh -0.53 3.78 1.93 2.26 4.61

Manipur -10.95 4.12 0.74 1.82 3.91

All India 8.37 2.78 3.49 1.44 2.61

Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics

Decadal Growth Rate of Net Sown Area in the Country

1.7 Net Sown Area is another important factor which affects

State-wise decadal growth rate in the net area sown

State 1960- 1971- 1981- 1991- 2001-

Andhra Pradesh 0.26 -0.78 -0.26 0.19 0.95

Goa Na Na 0.62 0.61 -0.70

Gujarat 0.21 0.07 -0.27 0.12 0.80

Haryana 0.91 0.21 -0.28 0.26 0.06

Himachal Pradesh 9.79 0.32 0.12 -0.51 -0.22

Jammu & Kashmir 0.19 0.61 -0.02 0.12 -0.32

Karnataka -0.13 -0.12 0.43 -0.50 0.00

Kerala 1.28 -0.04 0.34 -0.07 -0.60

Madhya Pradesh 1.48 0.07 0.30 0.00 0.18

Maharashtra 0.09 0.95 -0.20 -0.19 -0.12

Manipur 1.12 -1.33 0.00 0.00 7.52

Meghalaya Na 1.96 0.64 2.54 1.14

Mizoram Na Na 0.00 6.13 1.53

Nagaland 3.49 5.61 1.56 4.92 0.95

Orissa 0.34 0.37 0.42 -0.81 -2.40

Punjab -13.83 0.34 0.02 0.19 -0.28

Rajasthan 0.60 -0.14 -0.16 -0.26 0.77

Sikkim Na 10.63 2.48 0.00 -1.48

Tamil Nadu 1.37 -0.76 0.35 -0.87 -0.22

Tripura 0.99 -0.21 1.30 0.66 -1.08

Uttar Pradesh 0.09 0.03 0.00 -0.07 -0.13

West Bengal 0.21 -0.44 -0.41 0.18 -0.57

All India 0.42 0.22 0.08 -0.12 0.21

Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics

1.8 Our country is supporting 16.7% of World Population on only

State/Union Territory Current Net area Cultivated

Andhra Pradesh 2337 11117 13454