Government of India
Report
of
Inter-Ministerial Task Force
on
Agricultural Marketing Reforms
May –
2002
Ministry of Agriculture
Department of Agriculture & Cooperation
Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi
INDEX
Report of
Task Force On Agricultural Marketing Reforms
1.1 Introduction:
The agricultural produce sector has been one of the most important components
of Indian economy. Considerable progress has since been achieved in scaling new
heights in the production of foodgrains, commercial crops like cotton,
sugarcane, tea etc., fruits, vegetables and milk. The increasing trend of
agricultural production has brought, in its wake, new challenges in terms of
finding market for the marketed surplus. There is also pressure from all
segments of agricultural economy to respond to the challenges and opportunities
that the global markets offer in the liberalized trade regime. To benefit the
farming community from the new global market access opportunities, the internal
agricultural marketing system in the country also needs to be integrated and
strengthened. In particular the market
system has to be revitalized to a) provide incentives to farmer to produce
more; b) convey the changing needs of the consumers to the producers to enable
production planning; c) foster true competition among the market players and d)
to enhance the share of farmers in the ultimate price of his agricultural
produce.
2.1
Expert Committee on Agricultural
Marketing: In this context, Government of India in the Ministry of
Agriculture appointed an Expert Committee on
2.2
Important
recommendations made in the Report are as follows:
(a)
An
alternative marketing systems need to be developed in the country to promote
direct marketing, smooth raw material supplies to agro–processing industries,
competitive trading, organized retailing, information exchange and adoption of
innovative marketing systems and technologies;
(b)
Credit flow to agricultural sector need to
be substantially stepped up to meet increasing demand for capital expenditure
for developing marketing infrastructure and for pledge finance. Pledge
financing enables the farmers to take advantage of favorable prices and improve
their net margin;
(c)
A system of negotiable warehouse receipt
also need to be introduced in the country for agricultural commodities to
improve credit delivery, better loan recovery and convenience in commodity
management;
(d)
‘Forward’ and ‘Futures’ contracts need to be
regarded as direct and alternative marketing facilitators and be promoted for
their price risk management and price discovery roles;
(e)
Information Technology needs to be
extensively promoted in agricultural marketing to generate useful databases and
information packages for expanding marketing opportunities, especially for
online information on demand and
availability of different products; product specifications with regard to
price, quality, pack size, packaging material, quantity and the time frame of
supply;
(f)
‘Extension and training services need to
focus on assisting small and marginal farmers in i)
marketing of their produce, ii) advise on production planning; iii) market
information; iv) alternate marketing channels; v) improved marketing practices
including grading and packing; and vi) advantages of group marketing. The State
Agriculture Universities and the Regional & Other Centers of ICAR should be
given a mandate for applied research in agricultural marketing and related
areas.
3.1 Inter-Ministerial Task Force On
Marketing Reforms:
With a view to
examine the findings and recommendations of the Expert Committee and to suggest
measures to implement them, the Ministry of Agriculture constituted a Task
Force on 4.7.2001 under the chairmanship of Sri RCA Jain, Additional Secretary
in the Department of Agriculture & Cooperation (Annexure I). Under its
aegis, two national seminars were organized on the subject with the leaders of
industries and trade in collaboration with FICCI at
4.1
Legal Reforms:
At
present, though agriculture production is largely free from controls, the same
is not true of marketing and processing of agricultural commodities. The State
Governments alone are empowered to initiate the process of setting up of
markets for agricultural commodities in notified areas. Processing industries cannot buy directly
from farmers, except through notified markets.
Processed foods derived from agricultural commodities suffer from multiple
taxes at various stages starting from the harvest till the sale of final
processed products. There are stringent controls on the storage and movement of
several agricultural commodities. In the
present situation these restrictions are acting a disincentive to farmers,
trade and industries. Legal reforms can play an important role in making the
present marketing system more effective and efficient by removing unnecessary
restrictions and by establishing a sound framework to reduce uncertainty of the
markets. The State Agricultural Produce Marketing Regulations Act (APMC Act) and
the Essential Commodities Act (EC Act) are the two
important legislations that have to be amended to remove restrictive provisions
coming in the way of an efficient and competitive marketing system. Alongside,
there is a need to introduce through appropriate legal change, a ‘negotiable
warehousing receipt system’ in the country for agricultural commodities to
enhance institutional lending to the agricultural marketing sector and to
improve price-risk management.
4.2
The APMC Acts need to be amended by
the State Governments to specifically provide for the following:
4.2.1 Promotion of Agricultural Markets’ in
private/cooperative sector:
Under
the present Acts, State Governments alone are empowered to initiate the process
of setting up of regulated agricultural markets. As a result private sector
cannot take initiative in setting up markets equipped with best facilities.
High investments with entrepreneurial skills required for creation and managing
the market infrastructures have to come from private sector. In order to
encourage private sector to make massive investments required for development
of alternative marketing infrastructure and supporting services, provisions of
the APMC Act would need modification to create a lawful role for the private sector
in market development. Government’s role should be that of a facilitator rather
than that of having control over the management of markets.
The Govt. of Karnataka has taken
initiative in this direction and inserted a new Chapter (Chapter XIII A) in the
Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966, to provide for
the establishment of an ‘Integrated Produce Market’ to be owned and managed by
NDDB for marketing of fruits, vegetables and flowers in that State. Other
States also need to amend respective APMC Acts on similar lines to permit any
organization or corporate body to establish integrated facility for marketing
of agricultural produce. For the services so provided the owner/ operator of
the market should be enabled to collect service charges from the users. To
attract promoting agencies to take up these market infrastructure projects, the
Central/State Governments additionally need to extend support in the following
areas:-
i)
Deregulation of areas where new markets will be set up, along with
forward and backward linkages from the purview of the Agricultural Produce
Marketing Act.
ii)
Allocation of suitable and sufficient land with necessary approvals to
set up agricultural produce markets;
iii)
Provision of village land for Farmers Associations and Collection
centers;
iv)
Fast approval for services like electricity, water, sewage, telephones
etc.;
v)
Long term credit for initial capital investment, and
vi)
Declaration of the project as an infrastructure project within the
meaning of Section 10(23G) of the Income-tax Act.
4.2.2 Direct Marketing:
Direct marketing encourages farmers to
undertake grading of farm produce at the farm gate and obviates the necessity
to haul produce to regulated markets for sale.
Direct marketing enables farmers and processors and other bulk buyers to
economize on transportation costs and to considerably improve price
realization. In South Korea, for
instance, as a consequence of expansion of direct marketing of agricultural
products, consumer prices declined by 20 to 30 percent and producer-received
prices rose by 10 to 20 percent. This also provided incentive to largescale marketing companies to increase their purchases
directly from producing areas.
Direct
marketing by farmers to the consumers has been experimented in the country
through Apni Mandis in
Punjab and Haryana. The concept, with
certain improvements has been popularized in Andhra Pradesh through Rythu Bazars and in Tamil Nadu as Uzhavar Santhaigal. At
present, these markets are being run at the expense of the State exchequer, as
a promotional measure, to encourage marketing by small and marginal producers
of fruit and vegetables without the help of the middlemen. Considering the vastness of the country, more
and more such markets need to come up in the organized sector so that they can
be developed in tune with the backward & forward linkages. The APMC Acts
will also have to be amended to permit private and cooperative sectors to take
up direct marketing of agricultural commodities from the producing areas and
the farmers’ fields, without the necessity of going through licensed traders
and regulated markets. Such a reform will spur private initiative in building
consumer oriented market infrastructure in the country.
4.2.3 Contract Farming:
Contract farming arrangements of different
types have existed in various parts of the country for centuries for both
subsistence and commercial crops. The
commercial crops like sugarcane, cotton, tea, coffee etc. Have always involved
some forms of contract farming. Even in
the case of some fruit crops and fisheries, contract farming arrangements,
involving mainly the forward trading of commodities have been observed. However, in the wake of economic
liberalization, the concept of contract farming in which national or
multinational companies enter into contracts for marketing of the horticultural
produce and also provide technologies and capital to contract farmers has
gained importance. According to this, bipartie agreements are made between the farmer and the
company and the latter contributes directly to the management of the farm
through input supply as well as technical guidance and also markets the
produce. The main features of this type
of contract farming are that selected crops are grown by farmers under a buy
back agreement with an agency engaged in trading or processing. In such cases, the centralized processing and
marketing agencies supply technology and resources, including planting
materials and occasional crop supervision.
Under such contracts, the farmer assumes the production related risks,
which the price risk is transferred to the company. In some cases, the company also bears the
production risk, depending on the stage of crop growth at which the contract is
made. If the contract is made at flowering
or fruiting stage, the company bears the production risks also. In any case, the company bears the entire
costs of transaction and marketing. It
is this variant of contract farming which is said to be one of the ways by
which small farmers can participate in the production of high value crops like
fruits, vegetables, flowers etc. and benefit from market led growth.
Small farmers in India are generally
capital starved and cannot make major investment in land improvement and modern
inputs. Contract farming can fill up this gap by providing the farmers with
quality inputs, technical guidance and management skills. Although the company deals only with the
contract crop, the farmers' overall management skill may improve, thereby
helping him to raise the yields of both contract and non-contract crops. From the standpoint of corporate bodies,
farming reduces the supply risk, while the farmers enter into contractual
arrangements with companies in order to minimize price risks. The company and the farmers enter into
contracts to supply or purchase a specified quantum of the commodity at agreed
prices. The agreed contract may be
either formal or informal and may cover supply of inputs and marketing of
output. By entering into contract, the
company reduces the risk of non-availability of raw material and the farmer
reduces the risk of market demand and prices of his produce. The inputs and services supplied by firms may
include seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, credit, farm machinery, technical
advice, extension etc., or may involve only the supply of hybrid seeds and
marketing of produce.
Contract
farming is becoming an increasingly important aspect of agribusiness, whether
products are purchased by multinationals or by smaller companies. There are few success stories on contract
farming such as Pepsico
India in respect of potato, tomato, groundnut and chili in Punjab, Safflower in
Madhya Pradesh, oil palm in Andhra Pradesh, seed production contracts for
hybrids seed companies etc. which helped the growers in realization of better
returns for their produce. Other success
stories of contract farming are Amul and NDDB for
milk procurement, sugarcane cooperative in Maharashtra, and prawn-acqua culture in Andhra Pradesh. In our country this
approach has considerable potential where small and marginal farmers can no
longer be competitive without access to modern technologies and support. The
contractual agreement with the farmer provides access to production services
and credit as well as knowledge of new technology. Pricing arrangements can significantly reduce
the risk and uncertainty of market place.
In view of several observed and perceived
benefits of contract farming, such arrangements need to be encouraged widely,
for different commodities in different regions.
The limited commodity specific experience of contract farming in the
country shows that the spread and success of contract farming would require the
following conditions to be met.
a)
The contract
farming should be made legal. In case of
violation of contract, from either side, farmers as well as the company should
be in a position to approach an organization or institution, which can mediate
and settle the dispute.
b)
There should
be an institutional arrangement to record all contractual arrangements, may be
with the local market committee or panchayat or some
Government machinery. This will promote
and strengthen confidence building between the parties and also help solve any
dispute, arising out of violation of contract.
c)
The contract
farming should have a provision for both forward and backward linkages. Unless both input supply and market for the
produce are assured, small farmers will not be in a position to participate in
contract farming.
d)
There should
be bank finance to small and marginal farmers on easy terms. As the payment for contractual produce are
made through the bank, the recovery of such loans will be easier.
e)
The contracts
should be managed in a more transparent and participatory manner so that there
is greater social consensus in handling contract violation from either side
without getting involved in costly as well as lengthy process of
litigation. Also the contract need to be
drawn in a more comprehensive and flexible manner.
f)
There should
be a contract farmers association or cooperatives at the plant level which will
improve their bargaining power vis a vis the company and promote equality of partnership for
ensuring smooth functioning of any contract farming arrangement. In fact, contract farming may be more
beneficial to the farmers if there is farmers' association or cooperative which
can even replace the role of middlemen or commission agents who are involved in
marketing of the contract commodities on behalf of the company. The company representatives may also be a member
of the executive committee of such cooperatives. In fact, cooperative or joint farming
arrangement of small farmers should be encouraged to enable them to reap the
advantages of both economies of scale as well as of contract farming.
g)
The most
important thing for the sustainability of contract farming is the selection of
appropriate plant genotype. Unless the
plant material is of good quality and high yielding and less prone to pests and
diseases, the contract farmers may lose confidence and discontinue the
cultivation of contract crop in question.
h)
The proposed
contract crop should have a distinct advantage in terms of relative yield and
profit, which will provide higher income to the contract farmers on stable
basis.
i)
In many parts
of the country, agricultural tenancy is legally banned, although concealed
tenancy exists. Tenants who do not enjoy
security of tenure cannot participate in contract farming. Hence, legalization of tenancy would be a
precondition for enabling the tenant farmers to benefit from contract
farming. Although different forms of
land tenants including share-croppers can be adopted to maintain the contract
farming, security of tenure would be necessary.
j)
As assured
market for the farm produce motivates a farmer to enter into contract with a
company, a similar market prospect should exist for the processed products of
the company. Ultimately, it is the
success of the company's product in national and or international market, which
decides whether contract farming for any particular crop or commodity would
sustain.
k)
Other
Infrastructure: The success of contract farming requires that there should be
adequate infrastructure facilities of roads, public transport, telephones,
postal services, stable power and water supplies, cold storage facilities
etc. The situations of gluts and
shortages can be effectively managed only when such facilities are
available. Therefore, the Government
would have to provide the necessary infrastructure facilities of roads, public
transport, electricity cold storage, market yards etc. Moreover, public research and extension
systems would have to be reoriented to cater to the needs of both contract and
non-contract farming arrangements.
Specifically, the interactive roles of public and private research would
be important in developing appropriate crop varieties, cropping patterns and
crop rotations in each region, based on agro-climatic considerations. Furthermore, the government has to create a
conducive policy environment for encouraging national and international
companies to promote contract farming by creating an appropriate legal,
political and administrative system as well as necessary infrastructure.
l)
The
government needs to ensure that contract farming, which is generally commodity
specific and tends to promote monoculture does not grow beyond proportion to
destroy bio-diversity and agricultural ecology.
It may be necessary to provide necessary guidelines for land use
planning in each region in order to prevent such eventualities.
The present APMC Acts restrict the
farmer from entering into direct contract with any processor/ manufacturer/
bulk processor as the produce is required to be canalized through regulated
market. In the changed scenario, the
producer should be free to enter into forward contract whether inside or
outside the regulated market/ market area.
This will promote contract marketing between the producers and
processing factories with gains both to the producer through improved
competitiveness and the consumers by way of reasonable prices. It is necessary
to incorporate provision in the APMC Act to specifically allow setting up of
registered contract farming programs by processing or marketing firms. The APMC within whose jurisdiction the area
covered by contract farming agreement lies, should record the contract farming
agreements and act as a protector of producer’s and processor’s interests with
due legal support in its jurisdiction. Consequent upon recording of such
agreements by the APMC, the produce covered by the agreement should be allowed
to move freely from the farmers’ field to any destination in the country or
abroad without the necessity of going through licensed traders and regulated
markets. Since a contract farming program requires the company to undertake
research and extension activities and bear the marketing risk for the benefit
of farmers, incidence of taxes on the procurement of agricultural or
horticultural produce under the program by way of market fee, cess, duties, taxes etc., should as a promotional measure
be waived or minimized. In the State of Punjab, for instance, present incidence
of tax on procurement of Paddy and Groundnut under a contract-farming program
is stated to be 11.50 percent (Purchase tax – 4%; Cess
– 1%; Market Fee – 2%; Rural Development Fund – 2%; Aarhtia
charges –1%; Infrastructure costs –1.5%).
4.2.4 Rationalization of market fee:
The present system of levy of fee at multiple
points for the same commodity at different stages of transaction needs to be
replaced, by single point levy of market fee in the entire process of marketing
in the State. Further, collection of
market fee should be more in the nature of service charge based on the quality
services provided. The levy of fee can
be at different slabs in consonance with the type of scale of
services/facilities provided to all market users. There is also considerable
variation in the structure of taxes and fee on the agricultural produce in
various states, which distorts the operation of the domestic market. There is
need for bringing uniformity in the state level tax structure in agricultural
commodities for improving the marketing efficiencies. A table indicating market
charges and taxation on agricultural commodities in different States is given
at Annexure III.
4.2.5
The Standing Committee of Union Ministers
and Chief Ministers on Food Management and Agricultural Exports in its fourth
meeting held on March 23, 2002 held at New Delhi, has recommended suitable
amendments to the State Agricultural Produce Marketing Regulation Acts to
promote development of marketing in private/cooperative sectors, direct
marketing and contract farming programmes.
The Committee also felt that a major thrust was also needed to promote
pledge financing and introduction of negotiable warehousing receipt system, to
assist farmers in realizing better prices for their produce.
4.3
Essential Commodities Act,
1955:
The Essential Commodities Act is the
principal Act which controls the production, supply, storage and movement of,
and trade and commerce in a large number of agricultural commodities. Powers to
issue Control Orders under this Act have been delegated to the State
Governments. Exercising powers delegated under the Act, the State Governments/
UT Administrations have issued several Control Orders to regulate various
aspects of trading in agricultural commodities such as foodgrains, edible oils,
pulses, sugar etc. The Control Orders broadly relate to licensing of dealers
for trade, regulation of stock limits, restriction on movement, compulsory purchase
under the system of levy etc. Private
investment in large-scale storage and marketing has virtually become
non-existent due to the restrictive provisions of the EC Act and of various
Control Orders issued there under. Amendment to the Act is necessary to promote
investment in building agricultural marketing infrastructure, motivating
corporate sector and processing units to undertake direct marketing of
agricultural produce and to facilitate India as a whole becoming an integrated
market. By removing restrictions on storage of agricultural produce,
substantial warehousing capacity can also be created in private sector. This will lead to regional specialization
based on resource endowments and, therefore, would also help increase
efficiency in the production process.
Facilitating free trade and movement of agricultural commodities would
enable farmers to get best prices for their produce, achieve price stability
and ensure availability at reasonable prices in deficit areas. A list of
Control Orders issued by the States/UT Administrations as at Annexure IV.
4.3.1
Almost all the States/UT Administrations have
issued Licensing Orders, which prescribe, that any dealer (wholesaler or
retailer) requires taking a license if dealing in specified commodities and in
quantities in excess of those prescribed. The commodities covered by such
licensing requirements are mostly foodgrains including rice/ paddy and wheat,
pulses, oil seeds, edible oils and sugar. Under the licensing orders, some of
the State/ UTs have also prescribed maximum stock
limits for the dealers, the limits varying from State to State and within the
State from commodity to commodity. Some of the States/UTs
have issued Paddy/ Rice Levy orders.
Under these orders licensed dealers and millers are required to give a
prescribed percentage of the paddy/ rice to the State/ UT at notified prices.
Under the Paddy/ Rice Levy Orders some of the States/UTs
have also imposed restriction on movement of paddy/ rice. Paddy/ Rice can be transported only on the
strength of permits/ release orders, which are issued after the levy obligation
has been complied with. Apart from the Control Orders relating to licensing,
stock limits, levy, movement, control orders have also been issued by the
States/ UTs relating to other somewhat related
matters such as display of stocks and prices, regulation of catering
establishments, guest control, requisition of stocks, regulation of
distribution of card system.
4.3.2
The standing committee of Union Ministers
and Chief Ministers on Food Management and Agricultural Exports in its meeting
held on July 6, 2001 came to the conclusion that while the Essential
Commodities Act may continue as an umbrella legislation for the Centre and the
States to use when needed, a progressive dismantling of controls and
restrictions was also required.
4.3.3
After consultation with the concerned
Central Departments/ Ministries, the Central Government have issued an Order
under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act called the Removal of
(Licensing requirements, stock limits and Movement Restrictions) on Specified
Foodstuffs Order, 2002 on 15.2.2002. The
salient features of this Order are: -
i)
It pertains to specified commodities namely, wheat, paddy/ rice, coarse grains, sugar, edible oilseeds and edible oils.
ii)
It removes all restrictions on purchase, stocking, transport, etc. of
specified commodities and also the requirement of licensing of dealers in
respect of the specified commodities.
iii)
The Order takes effect after thirty days from the date of publication
in the Gazette (15.2.2002) notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained
in any order issued by the State Governments.
Any dealer may, thereafter, freely buy, stock, sell, transport, distribute,
etc. any quantity of these commodities and shall not require a permit or
license therefore under any order issued under the Essential Commodities Act,
1955.
iv)
Issue of any order by the States/ UTs under
the delegated powers for regulating by licenses, permit or otherwise, the
storage, transport, distribution, etc. of any of the specified commodities
shall require the prior concurrence of the Central Government.
4.3.4
The Central Government vide its Notification
No.GSR104(E) dated 15.2.2002 have also deleted 11 items in full and one in part
from the purview of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The commodities, which
continue to remain as essential under the Act, are given in Annexure – V.
4.3.5
The Standing Committee of Union Ministers and
Chief Ministers on Food Management and Agricultural Exports in its fourth
meeting held on March 23, 2002 held at New Delhi, while taking note of the
Government of India decision to remove restrictions on storage, movement, and
distribution of wheat, paddy, rice, coarse grains, sugar, edible oilseeds and
edible oils, recommended that similar restrictions relating to pulses also need
to be removed and that the States would also carry out further review to reduce
various Control Orders issued by the States in respect of other commodities.
5.1 Pledge Financing & Marketing Credit:
The Indian farming community consists
mostly of small and marginal farmers.
Micro level studies indicate that small farm holdings contribute about
54% of marketable surplus and distress sale by these small farmers account for
about 50% of the marketable surplus. The
farmers often sell their produce to square off their debts soon after
harvesting. The solution for this
problem lies in providing to them access to safe and scientific storage and
easy marketing credit. The strategy should be promotion of pledge financing
through a network of rural godowns and negotiable warehousing receipt system.
5.2 Limited
credit for marketing of crops (pledge financing) is available at present to the
farmers from the formal banking channels.
The quantum of financing done both by Commercial banks and Cooperative
banks for pledge financing is very little as compared to the crop production
loans. The loans given for pledge
financing also do not get captured in the existing MIS separately because the
quantum is small and they get clubbed along with short- term direct
agricultural loans for agriculture. NABARD has assessed the quantum of pledge
financing which is taking place in the country now to be around Rs.1200 crores
per year. With private sector participating in rural godowns, the quantum could
rapidly grow to a level of at least Rs. 7000 crores
by the end of X Five Year Plan period in 2007.
5.3
According to the RBI Guidelines, advances upto Rs.1 lakh can be given to
farmers against pledge/ hypothecation of agricultural produce (including
warehouse receipts) for a period not exceeding 6 months subject to the
condition that farmers have been given loan for raising the produce and
provided the borrower draws credit from the same bank. Such advances are
included as direct finance to farmers for agricultural purposes under priority
sector lending. There is no bar on banks
extending pledge loans for periods upto 12
months. However, this would not be an
automatic extension but will depend on the nature of crops stored in the godown
and the appropriate time to sell the produce and would be left to the financing
banks’ commercial judgment. While no
margin is levied for loans up to Rs.10,000/-, for loans above Rs.10,000/- the
prescription of margin is left to the individual bank’s discretion. For loans
up to and inclusive of Rs.2 lakhs, the rate of interest levied is “Not
exceeding PLR”. In respect of loans
above Rs.2 lakhs, banks are free to decide their own interest rates. However, the banks have the discretion to
offer loans at below PLR rates, to creditworthy borrowers based on a
transparent and objective credit policy approved by their Boards. After the deregulation of interest rates, the
banks have been given the freedom to decide the interest rates keeping in view
that cost of funds, transaction cost, etc.
5.4
To promote pledge loans for agricultural
commodities, it is recommended that in respect of high value crops, RBI should
enhance the ceiling of advances from existing Rs.1 lakh
to upto Rs.5 lakhs to farmers against pledge/
hypothecation of agricultural produce (including warehouse receipt) where the
farmers were given crop loans for raising produce, provided the borrowers draw
credit from the same bank. Such advances
should be categorized as direct finance to farmers for agricultural purpose,
under priority sector advances. The repayment of these loans may also be
extended from the existing 6 months to upto one year
depending on the nature of crops stored in the godowns and the appropriate time
to sell the produce. Crops which are subject to wide fluctuations (in prices)
need to be identified and marketing credit policies specifically be designed
for them. Banks should be encouraged to augment the resources of state
marketing cooperatives, which provide Pledge financing facilities to
farmers. Regional Rural Banks have an
extensive reach through their 14,500 branches all over the country. At present
NABARD refinance does not support Regional Rural Banks through its refinance
for Pledge Financing Loans. NABARD
should provide 100% refinance to RRBs, on similar
lines as that of Cooperative Banks. Arrangements should be developed so that
the warehousing receipts / godown receipts of private sector are acceptable to
the bankers for providing credit to farmers. Since pledge financing is
considered to be crucial to farmers to enhance their holding capacity to obtain
remunerative price for their produce, it is recommended that RBI should monitor
pledge financing to farmers within the overall target of 18% of NBC to
agriculture, fixed for commercial banks.
6.1 Negotiable
Warehousing Receipt System:
There
is a need to introduce a negotiable warehouse receipts system in the country,
with large benefits such as increased liquidity in rural areas, lower costs of
financing, shorter and more efficient supply chains, enhanced rewards for
grading and quality, development of other productivity-enhancing agricultural
services and better price-risk management. All these developments will result
in higher returns to farmers, better service to consumers (involving lower
prices, better quality and greater variety) and macro-economic benefits through
a more healthy trade balance in agricultural commodities. Introduction of the
system for agricultural commodities will also enhance competitiveness of Indian
agriculture in the domestic and global markets. The aim is to greatly expand
the availability of warehousing services, while making warehouse receipts a
prime tool of trade and trade financing throughout the country. It will also enable the banks to improve the
quality of their lending portfolio to the agricultural sector.
6.2
The
banking institutions are at present hesitant in making advances against the CWC
warehouse receipt when the holder thereof is not a person in whose favour the
receipt was originally issued.
Transferability of the warehouse receipt by endorsement is presently
further limited by the fact that the original holder of the warehouse receipt
cannot transfer it to another person without clearing the bank loans. This inhibits the negotiability of the
warehouse receipt and reduces its usefulness to the depositor who cannot sell
his goods before settling his loan with the banks. The State Warehouses Acts provide that a
receipt issued by a warehouseman is transferable by endorsement and shall
entitle its lawful holder to receive the goods specified in it on the same
terms and conditions on which the person who originally deposited the goods
would have been entitled to receive them.
Further, the present Warehouse Receipt is a document of title to the
goods as per the Sale of Goods Act, 1930.
Nevertheless, because of the imperfections in the present structure of
Warehouse Receipts, the usage of the present Warehouse Receipts remained
restricted to be accepted by the commercial banks as a collateral security for
grant of loans against the goods stored in the warehouses and the present
Warehouse Receipts has not yet gained its acceptability as a negotiable
instrument that could be freely transferred from one persons to another.
6.3
This can be accomplished by creating a
secure system, where warehouse operators are accredited by the banks and where
investors can build warehouses in the knowledge that they can gain
accreditation provided they meet prescribed standards. A system of quality
certification and grading of commodities will have to be established, with a
view to minimizing disputes and permitting cost savings through the combining
of stocks of different owners.
The
status of Warehouse Receipts has to be enhanced through legal changes for
creating an effective system of regulatory oversight and by instituting a
secured central electronic register allowing for the racking of all changes in
ownership and liens on Warehouse Receipts. Law relating to warehousing will
have to be amended and a formal regulatory authority instituted to enforce
standards and protect the interest of those holding warehouse receipts against
negligence, malpractice or fraud. The
Task Force recommends the following short and long term measures in this
regard:
a)
Short Term Measures:
i)
The Central Warehousing Corporations
and the State Warehousing Corporations should evolve commercially acceptable
quality standards in respect of various commodities in order to ensure quality
maintenance of the stored goods over a sufficiently longer period of time.
ii)
The Warehousing Corporations should
enforce standards both for quality and quantity at the warehouses, for which
required infrastructure as to the measurement of grades and standards need also
to be put in place, so as to reduce disputes on account of quality and quantity
standards, and to improve the credibility of the Warehouse Receipt.
iii)
The Warehousing Corporations are also
required to gear up appropriate market intelligence on the prices of various
commodities linked with the grades/ standards.
iv)
To begin with, selected commodities,
and a few selected varieties, should be taken into the net of such rigorous
quality standards for issue of Warehouse Receipts which could be easily traded
as more and more infrastructure is added in order to ensure foolproof
assessment of such standards. Additional
commodities as also additional varieties could gradually be added to this net.
v)
Adequate publicity measures should be
adopted so that the Warehouse Receipts issued against the deposit of goods
through the process of proper grading and standardization as per the rigorous
standards with reasonable period of storage and the right price depicted on
them so as to facilitate the general acceptance of Warehouse Receipt as a
negotiable instrument and to be traded easily from one person to another.
vi)
The Government of India is already
considering Value Added tax all over the country. The other barriers
particularly, the high level of public intervention in the market need to be
completely stopped or greatly liberalized in order to allow free flow of trade
in agricultural commodity all over the country.
b)
Long term Measures:
i)
A Central
legislation on the pattern of The Multimodal Transportation of Goods Act, 1993,
needs to be enacted for the Warehouse Receipts to be made fully negotiable
instrument. Law should be framed in such
a way that it gives full enforceability and transparency of the Warehouse
Receipts.
ii)
The CWC being
the premier warehousing agency at the national level, it should be the ideal
institution to be classified as the Accreditation Agency. In the long run some
new institution has to be established for the purpose of regulation as the
players cannot be the monitors and if the CWC becomes the regulatory body, it
has to go out of the warehousing field itself.
The Government in consultation with the CWC may decide this issue
further.
iii)
The
legislation should also take care of securing a system of central electronic
register like in the Stock Exchanges, for allowing the tracking of all changes
in the ownership and liens in respect of the Warehouse Receipts. As the fluctuations of the prices in the
market varying from place to place play a great role, necessary safeguards have
to be provided to prevent any political interventions.
7.1 Forward
and Futures markets:
In the light
of the perceived advantages from Forward and Futures Markets in terms of price
discovery and risk management, as market based instruments, such markets have
been identified as important tools of price stabilization. Extension of forward
and futures markets to all major agro commodities has, therefore, assumed great
importance. This urgency is also
reflected in the National Agricultural Policy of Government of India announced
in the year 2000. The need for
commencing futures trading in all agricultural commodities has been further
reiterated in the Budget Speech (2002-03) of the Finance Minister.
7.2
Commodity futures markets in the country
are regulated through Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952. The Forward Markets Commission (FMC) performs
the functions of advisory, monitoring, supervision and regulation in futures
and forward trading. Forward/futures
trading is done in exchanges owned by the associations registered under the
Act. These exchanges operate
independently under the guidelines issued by the FMC and of their byelaws.
7.3
As per the existing provisions of the
Forward Contract (Regulation) Act, 1952 commodities are broadly divided into 3
categories for purpose of forward/futures trading. In 81 commodities specified
in the Prohibited List, covered under section 17 of the Act, futures trading is
not allowed. In the Regulated List, 40 commodities permitted for futures
trading from time to time under Section 15 of the Act, notifications are issued
both for the commodity and for specific Exchanges approved for futures trading
in them. The 'residual commodities'
(i.e. not figuring in either the prohibited list or in the regulated list) are
called "free" commodities in respect of which the Forward Markets
Commission could give a certificate of registration to any applicant
Association/Exchange for commencing futures trading under section 14 of the
FC(R)A.
7.4
After
a commodity is approved for futures trading, whether under section 15 or
section 14, contract-wise approvals are given by the FMC to the concerned
Exchange(s). Normally permission for a
maximum of two contracts is given at any point of time; though in exceptional
cases contracts for a full year may be given approval in advance. Furthermore, two types of derivative
transactions are being allowed currently in commodities (i)
forward contracts [with two sub-categories Non-Transferable Specific Delivery
Contracts (NTSD) and Transferable Specific Delivery Contracts (TSD)] and (ii) hedge (futures) contracts. In 79
Commodities covered under section 18 of the Act even NTSD contracts are
prohibited, for which permission has to be sought under section 15 of the Act.
These approvals are also specifically laid down for any particularly
commodity-exchange-configuration. That
means the exchanges specifically allowed for NTSD forward contracts are not
allowed to undertake trading in other form of derivative contracts or an
exchange which is allowed for hedge contracts cannot undertake NTSD/TSD
contracts etc., unless it is specifically permitted. Other forms of commodity derivatives such as options, as well as commodity exchanges
trading in financial derivatives (equity or index options and futures, interest
rate derivatives, foreign exchange derivatives etc.) are not permitted. Thus, the degree of compartmentalization is absolute between commodity exchanges and
financial derivative exchanges and substantial
within Commodity Exchanges for different types of Commodity derivatives
themselves.
7.5 The
resulting commodity composition of futures trading is such that major
voluminous commodities (such as grain, pulses, metals etc.) are out of the
purview of futures trading; minor agricultural products are the ones generally
permitted (exception being oil complex and sugar, just recently approved). Many of these 'prohibited' commodities are
under such controls and policies such as MSP that commencing futures trading
has no meaning, as there is virtually no price risk to manage. Such a 'defensive approach' might have had
its logic at the time of scarcity it requires a change in the approach in the
liberalized system gearing up for international competition in the post-WTO era. Only if the markets are allowed to function
under proper regulatory environment, the agricultural economy - one of the
largest in the world - can fully exploit the benefits of markets in the country
and abroad.
7.6
Amendments
to some of the provisions of the Forward Contract (Regulation) Act, 1952 are
currently with the Parliamentary Standing Committee. These amendments include defining futures trading, removal of ban on options trading, provision of
registration of brokers, strengthening of FMC by including professionals as
part-time Members, enhancing the penalty provisions, etc. These amendments have
to be carried out expeditiously.
7.7
Commodity
futures trading in the country also suffers from a number of other limitations
as detailed below:
a)
Limited
and closed nature of membership in the Exchanges;
b)
Absence of many hedgers who have substantial
underlying positions;
c)
Absence of transparency;
d)
Limitations of prudential regulation; and
e)
Absence
of a legal framework for warehouse receipt system with full negotiability and
transferability.
7.8
Concerted
efforts, therefore, need to be made to expand the scope of futures trading,
along with general economic reforms. Efforts have to be made for increasing the
number of commodities permitted for futures trading. The objective has to be to
move towards a situation where all ‘candidate commodities’ would be
automatically allowed for futures trading under the overall regulation of the
commodity market regulator. The objective of expansion of futures trading
should be with a view to increase futures trading from the current level of
1.26% of the GDP in the year 2000-01 to that of at least 10% of the GDP by the
end of the X Plan (2006-07). The
negative list under Section 17 of the FC(R) Act need to be given a fresh look
so as to drastically prone it.
Prohibition of NTSD contracts under the Act may be discontinued. The design of contracts and type of contracts
should left to the Exchanges to be decided.
Only the appropriate regulatory mechanism and enabling provision should
be finalized with the approval of the market regulator.
7.9
Important institutional reforms required in this area are as
follows:
a)
Regulatory
framework has to be strengthened, making FMC an autonomous organization on the
lines of SEBI;
b)
Exchanges
have to be exposed to the best practices from across the world;
c)
Institutional
interface between various related agencies such as warehousing corporations,
banks and financial institutions, clearing and settlement corporations, system
of brokages and institutions for risk containments, have
to be strengthened;
d)
Enabling
provisions for commencing options
trading etc. have to be incorporated by means of an amendment to the Act;
e)
Initiatives
such as modern national level commodity exchanges and warehousing receipt
system have to be actively pursued;
f)
The
Exchanges and other stake-holders are to sensitized to the challenges facing
commodity futures trading and to ‘upgrade’ their responses;
g)
The
policy direction should aim towards convergence of futures markets i.e. trading
in derivatives products by all the interested exchanges by removing the
compartmentalization of commodity exchanges trading on in commodity derivatives products;
h)
The
level of general awareness, particularly that of farmers and cooperatives, on
futures trading and related issues needs to be raised for increasing their
participation in the futures markets.
7.10
As
already recommended, the system of warehouse receipts needs to be universalized
in futures trading for enhancing trade volumes and in minimizing transaction
costs. Warehousing Receipts should act
as good evidence of the receipt for goods and the terms of the contract and
storage, proof for their quality and condition, or “apparent order and
condition”. Warehousing receipts (WHR)
would go a long way in achieving these objectives apart from covering quality
risk, which is an important risk component of commodity futures trading. If quality risk is not covered price risk
management by means of futures contracts have limited meaning and could have
only qualified success. Legal framework
for making warehouse receipts transferable and negotiable has to be
strengthened in making negotiable warehouse system the demat of commodity futures trading.
8.1 Price Support Policy:
The Minimum Price Support Policy (MSP)
linked to procurement has served the country well in the past three decades.
However, in recent years it has started encountering problems mainly because of
surpluses of several agricultural commodities and excessive built up of stocks
with FCI. Even deficit states like Bihar, Assam, Eastern U.P. have started
generating surpluses of certain cereals. Also, as a result of operation of the
pricing Policy, private trade has not been able to play its role particularly
in respect of two major cereals, namely wheat and rice that account for over 70
percent of total food grain production in the country. Under the MSP scheme
prices of major agricultural commodities are not only exogenously determined
but these prices are defended through nodal procurement agencies like FCI. The adverse effects lay hidden as long as the
country operated in a situation of shortages in a relatively closed economy.
Bringing equilibrium in the market, a function that is normally performed by
private trade, was successfully performed by the public sector nodal
procurement agencies. In the process the private trade has been marginalized.
In the changing environment it is essential to think of an alternative policy,
particularly if the private trade is to be restored its rightful role in the
market place.
8.2
There is a need to work out an alternative
to the existing MSP linked procurement scheme. Till the policies are developed
and implemented which assign rightful role to private trade in the marketing of
agricultural commodities, the existing nodal agencies need to be strengthened
and States need to be encouraged to undertake decentralised procurement.
8.3
The Fair Average Quality (FAQ) norms fixed
for different agricultural commodities should not be relaxed frequently,
because such relaxation breeds inefficiency and discourages quality. At present, there is no reliable and
transparent system existing at the field level and the grading is done more or
less on discretionary basis. This system
of subjective assessment needs to be replaced by a system of objective criteria
by providing moisture measuring equipments and other equipments, which can help
in measuring Fair Average Quality. FAQ norms have to be strictly enforced and
the quality upgraded by educating the farmers.
8.4
There is a need to give wide publicity among
the farmers to the FAQ norms fixed by the Government through different means of
media. Due to ignorance of FAQ norms of
the farmers, unscrupulous elements enter the market and purchase agricultural
commodities at much lower price than the MSPs fixed
by the Government. In this way, the
farmers are exploited. Cases of farmers
being turned back on the ground of non-conformity with the FAQ norms are also
frequent, leading to hardship and resentment amongst the farmers.
8.5
The number and location of purchase centers should be decided sufficiently in advance and given
wide publicity. The nodal agencies
should decide, in consultation with the State Governments, the location and
number of purchase centers to be set up much in advance
of the marketing season. The information
regarding number and location of purchase centers
should be given wide publicity through media, radio, television, leaflets, etc.
8.6
As long as the services of nodal agencies
are being used for market intervention and procurement, etc., they must be
given full support so as to enable them to operate efficiently. Necessary budgetary provisions need to be
made by the Government in this regard so that their operations could be carried
out smoothly. Likewise, the role of
banks in financing the public and cooperative procuring agencies, need to be
made more active and participative.
8.7 The Market
Intervention Scheme (MIS) suffers from limited operations, since it is
implemented on the request of the State Government(s) willing to bear 50% of
the losses, incurred if any, in its implementation. The implementation of the
scheme needs to be made more flexible and easy.
The provision of sharing of losses by the State Government(s) needs
re-examination.
8.8
There are two ways in which support can be
extended to farmers for protection of their incomes. One way could be to de-link MSP from
procurement. Under this model, while MSP could continue to be fixed as at
present prices may be determined by market forces. The farmers could be
reimbursed the difference between the market prices and MSP on the marketed
produce. The other method could be to guarantee the income level of farmers
through an insurance programme where guaranteed income will be determined on
the basis of MSP and historical yield of the farmer and the difference between
guaranteed income and actual income (actual production and market price) will
be made good under the insurance programme.
Positive implications of such an Income Insurance Scheme (IIS) are as
follows:
a) Private trade will play a major role in the market and the
pricing mechanism would reflect the market fundamentals of demand and
supply. Therefore, any excess production
or supply will cause the prices to decline.
The decline in prices will help in creating increased demand,
particularly from the poorer sections or BPL segment of population. Besides, if prices fall below international
levels, the commodity can also be exported competitively. There would thus be a possibility of sustained
exports of foodgrains from the country.
On the other hand, in case of decline in production, the prices will
increase, either obviating the need for income support payments to farmers and
thus reduce the liability under the Insurance program. The requirements of the weaker sections of
the society, however, would continue to be met through PDS from buffer stocks
maintained by public sector organisations like FCI and SFCs
and through States.
b) The existing system of MSP-procurement is essentially
functional in the States of Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Andhra
Pradesh. Even here only a small segment
of farmers is covered. Thus the benefit
of the present policy, which is being implemented at such a huge cost is
available only to a very small number of farmers in a few States in the
country. The alternative Scheme will
have a much wider reach and potentially a larger number of farmers who opt for
the insurance cover in all the States will be benefited.
c)
The Scheme offers comprehensive coverage of
income rather than yield risks alone.
Farmers will be benefited from such a comprehensive risk coverage
consistent with the objective of the National Agricultural Policy – 2000.
d) The
alternative Scheme provide incentive to the farmers for improving quality. In the MSP regime, quality is confined to
FAQ, which also is subject to flexibility.
The farmers’ real income in market will be rewarded for quality grade
while his income protection is covered by the Insurance. This will also help the country to compete in
the world market.
9.1 Information Technology in Agricultural
Marketing: Market information is needed by farmers in planning production
and marketing, and is equally required by other market participants in arriving
at optimal trading decisions. The existence and dissemination of complete and
accurate marketing information is the key to achieving both operational and
pricing efficiency in the marketing system and IT has an important role to play
in the process.
9.2
There are several areas of
agricultural marketing with which farmers need to be fully familiarized in
order to improve price realization. Promotion of nationally and internationally
acceptable standards of grading and standardization, packaging and labeling,
storage and warehousing and sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures and quality
certification in farm sector will enable trade and processing sector to
undertake large scale agricultural marketing operations in domestic as well as
international markets. Once the farm produce is standardized and labeled,
backed by reputed quality certification, it can be directly offered for sale in
national and international markets.
9.3 Several
Ministries in Government of India take decisions directly affecting the process
of Agricultural marketing in the country. Important among these are
Agriculture, Commerce, Food and Public Distribution, Consumer Affairs and
Health. Several central institutions set up by Government of India viz. NCDC,
NAFED, TRIFED, NDDB, NHB, APEDAetc., are directly
involved in implementing programs to strengthen agricultural marketing in the
country and to help farmers in the process of marketing of agricultural
produce. Then there are Commodity Boards and Export Promotion Councils for
specific commodities and to promote exports. All the relevant programs and
policies of these institutions need to be disseminated to the farm producers
and the target groups to enable them to take full advantage of newer
opportunities made available by the Government. Although many of these
organizations have their independent web sites hosted through NIC or other
internet service providers, the portal developed by NIC (AGMARK-NET) should
provide linkages to these sites to access marketing related information to all
market players.
9.4 Data on various aspects of agricultural marketing is important for policy formulation, infrastructure planning and research. To facilitate both the Government as well as the private sector in planning development of an appropriate marketing strategy in agriculture sector, it would be necessary to create at national level an ‘Atlas of Agricultural Markets’ which would provide information in respect of each commodity, major areas of production, movement and storage and of market and consuming centers. In parallel, commodity profile should be prepared for all major commodities outlining the market requirements in terms of quality, standards, labeling, packing, storage, transport, regulations, taxation, warehousing, forward and futures markets etc. This information has to be translated in local languages and uploaded onto the State level portals to facilitate market led extension to farming community in local language through internet.
9.5
The ongoing central sector scheme of
establishing ‘market information
network’ has to be strengthened to cover above areas and to provide coverage to
all the wholesale agricultural markets in the country during the 10th
Plan period. In such markets where there is manpower constraint to operate the
scheme, services can be run by encouraging private entrepreneurs with suitable
incentives and provision of necessary infrastructure in the market yard.
9.6
Facility of ‘electronic’ trading or
e-commerce should also be provided on the market information network portal to
enable producers to directly transact business with the buyers. This would
enable increasing volume of direct trading in standardized quality products
across the country, benefiting both the consumers as well as the producers.
9.7
As trade participation grows with
reduced trade barriers and development, a country's ability to meet and apply
sanitary and phytosanitary standards become more important for market access
and domestic consumers. Applying such
standards means building effective systems to control or eradicate plant and
animal diseases and to ensure the safety of exported and imported food
products. Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) methodology is
increasingly being implemented worldwide to improve food safety and reduce the
incidence of foodborne illness. IT has to play a
significant role in the dissemination of animal and plant health and food
safety standards and regulations to farming community and other people involved
in the process of agricultural marketing, to enhance competitiveness of
agricultural produce in the liberalized markets.
a)
Legal
Reforms b) Direct
Marketing
c)
Group
Marketing d) Contract
Farming
e) Grading & Standardization
f) SPS
Measures
g)
Packaging
h) Storage
and Cool Chain
k)
Pledge Financing
l) Warehousing
m) Transportation
n) Market Infrastructure
o)
Forward and Futures Market p) Quality
Certification
q) Commodity Exchanges
r)
I.T.
in Agricultural Marketing
s)
Agri-business
t)
WTO and its
Implication
10.4
The Ministry of Agriculture, Government
of India, in association with NABARD, has recently launched a unique programme
to take improved methods of farming to each and every farmer across the
country. This programme aims to tap the
expertise available in the large pool of Agriculture Graduates to set up Agriclinic or Agribusiness Center and offer professional
extension services to innumerable farmers.
Committed to this programme, the Government is now also providing
start-up training to graduates in Agriculture, or any subject allied to
Agriculture like Horticulture, Sericulture, Veterinary Sciences, Forestry,
Dairy, Poultry Faring, Fisheries, etc.
Those completing the training can apply for special start-up loans for
the venture from commercial banks with refinance and margin money support from
NABARD.
10.5
Agriclinics and Agribusiness Centers
would provide paid for services for enhancement of agricultural production and
income of farmers. These centers would
advise farmers on crop selection, best farm practices, post-harvest value-added
options, key agricultural information (including Internet-based weather
forecast), price trends, market news, risk mitigation and crop insurance,
credit and input access, as well as critical sanitary and phyto-sanitary
considerations, which the farmers have to keep in mind.
a)
Structure Conduct and Performance
analysis of agricultural markets.
b)
Role and Effectiveness of Marketing
Institutions.
c)
Study of cost and margins of important
agricultural/ horticultural crops.
d)
Export effectiveness of agricultural
and horticultural crops.
e)
Information needs of stake holders in
agricultural marketing
f)
Marketing of organically produced
commodities.
g)
Price discovery mechanism of different
agricultural commodities.
h)
Supply
Chain Management
i)
Implication
of WTO on agricultural marketing.
j)
Risk
Management in agriculture.
11.1 Market Infrastructure Development: A marketing system backed by strong, adequate
infrastructure is at the core of agricultural marketing. Market infrastructure is important not only
for the performance of various marketing functions and expansion of the size of
the market but also for transfer of appropriate price signals leading to
improved marketing efficiency. High investment and entrepreneurial skills are
required for creation and management of the agricultural marketing
infrastructure. The situation of control by the state has to be eased to
facilitate greater participation of the private sector, particularly to
engender massive investments required for the development of marketing
infrastructure and supporting services.
Investment requirement for the development of marketing, storage and
cold storage infrastructure in the country during 10th Plan has been
estimated to be of the order of Rs. 12,230
crores. The outlays required for the
segments are as follows:
(i) Market Infrastructure:
(Rs. in Crore)
|
Market Infrastructure |
Unit
Cost |
Physical
Targets
(Nos) |
Financial
Outlays
|
||
|
Central |
Private/ Cooperative |
Total
|
|||
|
a)
Wholesale markets
b)
Rural primary markets/ Apni Mandis
c)
Grading, Standardization, and Quality
Control Units at village/market level
d)
Strengthening of Agmark Laboratories
e)
Modernising Testing Facilities in State Grading
Laboratories
f)
Awareness and training programme. |
2.00
0.40
0.08
0.20 |
561
6984
1000
15
50
|
291*
723.2*
20.80
10
10
15
|
831
2070.40
59.20
- |
1122
2793.60
80
10
10
15 |
Total
|
|
|
1070 |
2960.60 |
4030.60 |
·
Weightage has been given for higher public investment in tribal and for hilly
areas and for SC/ST entrepreneurs.
(ii)
Storage
Infrastructure: As on date, the
total storage capacity available with different public sector agencies is
788.35 lakh MT. In the Cooperative Sector, the
National Cooperative Development Corporation (NCDC) has assisted in the
creation of 137.36 lakh MT storage capacity with the
rural cooperatives. For creating storage
in cooperatively under developed States/ Union Territories, the NCDC has
operated a scheme during 1999-2000 to construct 52 rural and 9 marketing
godowns of 9350 Mt capacity.
The Government has formulated a
National Storage Policy aimed at harnessing the resources of the public and
private sector for augmentation of infrastructure to handle foodgrains
including construction of bulk storage facilities and also conventional godowns.For the creation of new storage capacity, the
following further steps are being taken:
a)
Creation of additional storage capacity
(estimated at 54 lakh tones) by State Governments,
SWC and CWC on the basis of long-term guarantee by FCI;
b)
Creation of 21 lakh
tones capacity for bulk handling, storage and transportation facilities through
private sector participation at 11 locations;
c)
Creation of conventional godowns
totaling 5.88 lakh tones through private sector
participation at 54 locations in 14 States; and
d)
Creation of new rural storage capacity
of 18.5 lakh tones and renovation/ modernization of
existing cooperative storage capacity of 1.5 lakh
tones under the ‘Gramin Bhandaran
Yojana’ recently implemented by the Government of
India.
Keeping in view the marketable foodgrain surplus by 2007 and the available storage capacity,
it is recommended that additional storage capacity of 130 lakh
tones be created in the country during 10th Plan period. Of this, 85
lakh tons is proposed to be created in private sector
at an outlay of 2310 crores, including Govt. of India assistance towards back
ended subsidy of Rs.570 crores. The break-up of physical and financial outlays
for additional capacity is as under:
|
Agency |
Commodity
wise |
Capacity
(lakh tons) |
Unit
rate per ton. (Rs.) |
Total
Amount (Rs.
In crore) |
|
Private
Sector |
Foodgrains
etc. |
60.00 |
2600.00 |
1560.00 |
|
FCI |
Foodgrains |
4.82 |
2600.00 |
125.00 |
|
CWC |
General
purpose |
15.00 |
2200 to 3500.00 |
525.00 |
|
SWC
|
General
purpose@ |
20.00 |
1600.00 |
320.00 |
|
NCDC |
General
purpose@ |
5.00 |
2500 to 4000.00 |
200.00 |
|
Other
Rural Godowns |
General
purpose@ |
25.00 |
3000 .00 |
750.00 |
|
Total
|
|
129.82 |
- |
3480.00 |
@
Includes Foodgrains, Fertilisers, Pesticides,
Implements, Horticulture Produce, Spices, etc.
(iii)
Cold
Storage infrastructure:
The
National Horticulture Board is providing assistance under a Central Scheme for
the construction/ renovation of cold storages in the country. Under the Scheme,
24 lakh tones of cold storage capacity has been
created in the country in the last two years of its implementation. Keeping in
view the expected market surplus of fruits & vegetables by 2007 and the
available cold storage capacity, the Task Force recommends creation of an
additional capacity of 56.50 lakh tons to be created
during 10th Plan Period. The total outlay on construction/creation
of cold storage capacity and cold chain during 10th Plan Period
would be Rs.3095 crores, including Govt. of India assistance towards back ended
subsidy of Rs.1175 crores. The break-up of physical and financial outlays for
additional capacity is as under:
(Rs. in crores)
Type
|
Capacity
(lakh tons) |
Unit
cost / ton |
Total cost |
|
1.Cold Storage |
40.00 |
Rs.5,000 |
2000 |
|
2.Cold
Storage(Reh./ Mod.) |
10.00 |
Rs.1,000 |
100 |
|
3.Onion
storage |
6.00 |
Rs.2,000 |
120 |
|
4.
Cold chain ( reefer vans, zero energy chambers etc.) |
|
|
2500 |
|
Total 56.00
|
|
4720 |
|
11.3 In
order to encourage private sector to make massive investments required for
development of alternative marketing infrastructure and supporting services,
provisions of the APMC Act would need modification to create a lawful role for
the private sector in market development. There is a need to i) reduce the regulatory controls and simplify the
procedures; ii) making complementary investment by the State and Central
Governments; iii) providing subsidy to enable the private sector initiative to
attain economic viability; iv) ensuring adequate credit flows to agricultural
marketing activities and v) declaring the market development projects as
‘infrastructure’ projects within the meaning of Section 10(23G) of the Income
Tax Act. To attract promoting agencies to take up the infrastructure projects,
the Central/State Governments need to additionally extend support in the
allocation of suitable land to set up markets, deregulation of areas where new
markets will be set up from the purview of the APMC Act, fast approval for
foreign technical assistance, import of equipment and for services like
electricity, water, sewage, telephones etc. External funding can additionally
be sought to augment the resources of Central and State Governments to support
the infrastructure development program. Investments in market infrastructure
has to be linked to deregulation and
reforms in agricultural marketing sector.
12.1
Implementation Plan:
With a
view to ensuring effective implementation of the proposed reforms outlined in
this Report, the following important measures in particular may be considered
by the Government for follow up action:
12.2
All the State Governments should amend the
State Agricultural Produce Marketing Regulations Act (APMC Act) inter alia to provide specifically for the following:
a)
Enabling private and cooperative
sectors to establish and operate (including levy of service charge)
agricultural marketing infrastructure and supporting services.
b)
Direct marketing of agricultural
commodities from producing areas and farmers’ fields, without the necessity of
going through licensed traders and regulated markets.
c)
Permitting ‘Contract farming’ programs
by processing or marketing firms. The
APMC within whose jurisdiction the area covered by contract farming agreement
lies, should record the contract farming agreements and act as a protector of
producer’s and processor’s interests with due legal support in its
jurisdiction. Incidence of taxes by way of market fee, cess,
duties, taxes etc. on procurement of agricultural or horticultural produce
under the ‘Contract farming’ program should be waived or minimized.
d)
Rationalization of levy of market fee
by introducing single point levy of market fee in the entire process of
marketing in the State. Levy of market
fee should be more in the nature of service charge based on the quality of
services provided. The levy of fee can
be at different slabs in consonance with the type of scale of
services/facilities provided to all market users
e)
To attract promoting agencies to take
up the marketing infrastructure development projects, all the State
Governments/ UT Administrations and the concerned Departments of Central
Government should be requested to additionally extend support in the following
areas:-
i)
Deregulation
of areas where new markets will be set up, along with forward and backward
linkages from the purview of the Agricultural Produce Marketing Act.
ii)
Allocation of
suitable and sufficient land with necessary approvals to set up agricultural
produce markets;
iii) Provision of
village land for Farmers Associations and Collection centers;
iv) Fast approval
for services like electricity, water, sewage, telephones etc.;
v) Long term
credit for initial capital investment, and
vi) Declaration
of the project as an infrastructure project within the meaning of Section
10(23G) of the Income-tax Act.
(Action: Ministry of Agriculture,
Department of Agriculture & Cooperation)
12.3
With a view to attract requisite
investment for the development of marketing infrastructure in the country, a
new central scheme should be formulated to provide credit linked assistance for
development of general and commodity specific agricultural produce markets and
for strengthening of existing agricultural markets, wholesale, rural periodic
and in tribal areas. For the construction of storage, cold storage and cold
chain infrastructure, the ongoing central schemes should be further expanded to
create additional capacity of rural storage of 85 lakhs MT, cold storage of
56.00 lakhs MT and requisite cold chain infrastructure during the Xth Plan Period.
Central assistance should be conditional and linked to reforms by the
States in the APMC Acts and deregulation. Considering the magnitude of outlay
required external funding should be sought, if need be, to augment the
resourced of Central and State Governments to support the infrastructure
development program.
(Action: Ministry of Agriculture,
Department of Agriculture & Cooperation)
12.4
Credit for marketing of crops (pledge financing)
should be substantially stepped up to reach a level of at least Rs.7000 crores
by the end of 10th Five Year Plan Period in 2007. RBI need to
formulate appropriate marketing credit policies and to introduce a separate MIS
for loans given for pledge financing in order to monitor progress. NABARD need to augment the resources of
State Marketing Cooperatives to provide pledge financing facilities to farmers
and to provide 100% refinance to RRBs, on similar
lines as that of cooperative banks. RBI
should also consider evolving an appropriate arrangement to ensure that
warehousing receipts/ godown receipts issued by licensed operators of rural
godowns are acceptable to bankers for providing credit to farmers. To
facilitate easy access to pledge loan, RBI should evolve a simplified procedure
in consultation with commercial banks.
(Action: RBI/NABARD)
12.5
For the introduction of a system of
negotiable warehousing receipt system in respect of agricultural commodities,
the Central Warehousing Corporation and the State Warehousing Corporations
should evolve commercially acceptable quality standards in respect of various
commodities in order to ensure quality maintenance of the stored goods over a
sufficiently longer period of time. The Warehousing Corporations should enforce
standards both for quality and quantity at the warehouses, for which required
infrastructure as to the measurement of grades and standards also need to be
put in place, so as to reduce disputes on account of quality and quantity standards,
and to improve the credibility of the Warehouse Receipt.
12.6
In order to grant the status of
‘negotiability’ to godown receipts issued by licensed godown operators, the
Negotiable Instruments Act should be amended or in the alternative, a Central
legislation on the pattern of The Multimodal Transportation of Goods Act,
1993, be enacted for the Warehouse
Receipts to be made fully negotiable instrument. Law should be framed in such a way that it
gives full enforceability and transparency of the Warehouse Receipts.
(Action: Ministry of Consumer Affairs,
Food and Public Distribution, Ministry of Finance)
12.7
For the promotion of Forward and Futures
markets in agricultural commodities, the following action is recommended:
a)
The negative list under section 17 of the FC
(R) Act may be given a fresh look so as to drastically prune it. Prohibition and regulation of NTSD contracts
under the Act may also be discontinued.
b)
Commodity
specific approach to futures trading may be discontinued. Instead recognized associations /exchanges
could apply for permission for trading in any ‘contracts’ other than for the
commodities in the negative list from the Commodity Market Regulator under the
overall rules, procedures and guidelines of the regulator.
c)
Exchanges
should come out with feasibility studies on commodities and products based on a
cost benefit analysis of futures trading in such commodities/products. The system of piecemeal opening up and
permission based on the Regulator’s/Government’s evaluation may be
discontinued. Contracts proposed by the
Exchanges based on proper feasibility studies should be studied and approved by
the Regulator.
d)
The
design of contracts and the type of contracts (TSD, futures, options – (as and when statutorily
permitted) should be left to the Exchanges to be decided. Only the appropriate regulatory mechanism and
enabling provisions should be finalized with the approval of the market
regulator.
e)
The
system of warehouse receipts need to be universalized in futures trading for
enhancing volumes and for minimizing transaction costs.
f)
The
regulator (presently FMC) needs to be strengthened and made an autonomous
organization similar to SEBI with adequate powers and professional capabilities
to monitor and surveillance in an expanded and liberalized futures market in
the country.
g)
The
role of commodity market regulator may be redefined to regulate all derivative
products, not just for commodity futures –
like CFTC in the US – so that their specialized expertise can be optimally
used.
(Action: Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public
Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs)
12.8
The Minimum Price Support Policy (MSP) has
served the country well in the past three decades. However, in recent years it
has started encountering problems mainly because of surpluses of several
agricultural commodities and also the resultant excessive foodstocks
with FCI. In the changing environment it is essential to think of an
alternative policy delinking MSP from procurement particularly if the private
sector is to be restored its rightful role in the marketing of agricultural
produce. The alternative policy should allow market forces to determine the
price and provide financial support through an insurance programme to farmers
for protection of their incomes in falling markets. The income protection
programme could be taken up initially in a few selected States for agricultural
commodities like oilseeds, pulses, rice and wheat. Till the alternative policies are developed
and implemented, the existing nodal/ central agencies and State organizations
need to be strengthened to undertake decentralised procurement of foodgrains.
(Action: i. Ministry of Agriculture, Department of
Agriculture & Cooperation
ii. Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and
Public Distribution,
Department of Food an Public
Distribution)
12.9
The
Fair Average Quality (FAQ) norms fixed for different agricultural commodities
should not be relaxed frequently, as such relaxation breeds inefficiency and
difficulties in disposal of stocks. At
present, there is no reliable and transparent system existing at the field
level and the grading is done more or less on discretionary basis. This system of subjective assessment needs to
be replaced by a system of objective criteria by providing moisture measuring
equipments and other equipments, which can help in measuring Fair Average
Quality.
FAQ norms have
to be strictly enforced while providing wide publicity and educating the
farmers on quality issues.
The nodal agencies should decide, in consultation with the State
Governments, the location and number of purchase centres to be set up much in
advance of the marketing season. The
information regarding number and location of purchase centres should be given
wide publicity through media, radio, television, leaflets, etc
(Action: Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public
Distribution,
Department of Food an Public Distribution)
12.10
The
Market Intervention Scheme (MIS) needs to be reviewed to make it more flexible
and easy. The provision of sharing of
losses by the State Government(s) under the Scheme also needs to be
re-examined.
(Action: Ministry of Agriculture,
Department of Agriculture & Cooperation)
12.11
Use of Information Technology need to
be extensively promoted to provide market-led extension services to farmers and
other market functionaries.
The ongoing Central Sector Scheme of
establishing ‘market information
network’ should provide coverage to all the wholesale agricultural markets in
the country during the 10th Plan period. It should also be
diversified to promote nationally and internationally acceptable standards of
grading and standardization, packaging and labelling, storage and warehousing
and sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures and quality certification to enable
trade and processing sector to undertake large scale agricultural marketing
operations in domestic as well as international markets. In markets where there
is manpower constraint to operate the scheme, services can be procured from
private entrepreneurs with suitable incentives and provision of necessary
infrastructure in the market yards.
(Action: Ministry of Agriculture,
Department of Agriculture & Cooperation)
(Action:
Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture & Cooperation)
13.
The
endeavour of the Government at the Central as well as State level should be to operationalize the recommendations made in this report in a
time bound manner. The measures relating
to infrastructure development should be taken up for implementation during the
X Plan period through appropriate schemes and programmes.
With a view to monitor the
implementation of the aforesaid recommendations, a Monitoring Committee of
officials may be constituted under the Chairmanship of the Joint Secretary
(Agricultural Marketing), Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, along
with representatives from the Department of Consumer Affairs, the Department of
Food and Public Distribution, Ministry of Law, Ministry of Finance, Reserve
Bank of India (RBI) and the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development
(NABARD) and National Cooperative Development Corporation (NCDC).
(Action:
Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture & Cooperation)
14.
The
agriculture markets have the potential to act as a powerful tool for improving
the economic viability of agriculture, for reduction of rural poverty and for
achieving sustainable agriculture development.
The Task Force believes that with effective implementation of the
recommended measures by the concerned Governments and the Agencies,
agricultural markets will achieve nationwide integration enabling the country
to meet the challenges posed by liberalization of trade. The reforms package would also enhance the
competitiveness of the Indian farmer in the global market empowering him to
take advantage of the emerging market access opportunities in the wake of WTO.
***
No. 11016/3/2000-M II
Government
of India
Ministry
of Agriculture
Department
of Agriculture &
Cooperation
Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi,
Dated the 4th July, 2001.
OFFICE
ORDER
Constitution of Inter-Ministerial Task Force to
examine the recommendations of the Expert
Committee on Strengthening and Developing of Agricultural Marketing.
An Expert
Committee set up by the Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture and
Cooperation on 'Strengthening and Developing of Agricultural Marketing' under
the Chairmanship of Shri Shankerlal Guru has
submitted its final report to the Government on 29.06.2001. The Expert
Committee has made several recommendations in its report for consideration of
the Government. These recommendations pertain to several Department.
2. With a view to examine these recommendations and to suggest
measures to be taken for implementing them, an inter-ministerial Task Force is
hereby constituted under the Chairmanship of Shri R.C.A Jain, Additional
Secretary, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture.
Among others, the Task Force shall make recommendations on the measures to be
taken in respect of the following:
I.
The legislative reforms considered necessary in making the agricultural
marketing system in the country more effective and efficient.
II.
Institutional and other policy support measures for management of price
risk, credit market information networks required to develop agricultural
marketing in the country to meet the emerging challenges of trade
liberalization;
III.
Supportive marketing infrastructure development required in the country
within Government, Cooperative and private sectors from farm level upwards;
3. The composition of the
Inter-Ministerial Task Force shall be as under:
(1) R.C.A.
Jain,
… Chairman
Additional Secretary,
Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi.
(2) Shri
Santosh Nautiyal,
Additional Secretary,
Department of Consumer Affairs, Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi.
(3) Shri
K.D. Singh,
Additional Secretary,
Department of Legal Affairs
Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi.
(4) Dr.
V. K. Taneja,
Animal Husbandry Commissioner,
Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying,
Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi.
(5) Shri
Shekhar Aggarwal,
Joint Secretary,
Banking Division,
Ministry of Finance,
Jeevan Deep Building, Parliament
Street, New Delhi.
(6) Shri
B.K. Bal,
Joint Secretary,
Department of Food & Public Distribution,
Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi.
(7) Ms.
Vibha Puri Das,
Joint Secretary,
Department of Food Processing Industries,
Panch Sheel
Bhavan, August Kranti Marg,
New Delhi.
(8) Shri
R. Gopalan,
Joint Secretary,
Ministry of Commerce,
Udyog Bhavan, New Delhi.
(9) Shri
D.K. Trehan,
Economic & Statistical Adviser,
Directorate of Economics & Statistics,
Department of Agri.
& Cooperation,
Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi.
(10) Chairman,
Agricultural Products Export Development
Authority (APEDA),
National Cooperative Union Bank of India.
3, Institutional Area, August Kranti Marg, Hauz
Khas, New Delhi-110 016
(11) Shri
D. Tikku,
Managing Director,
National Dairy Development Board,
Post Box No, 40, Anand
-
388
001, Gujarat.
(12) Shri
J.P. Negi,
Executive Director,
National Horticulture Board,
85, Institutional Area, Sector - 18, Gurgaon
-
122015,
Haryana.
(13) Shri
N.K. Choubey,
Managing Director,
Central Warehousing Corporation,
4/1, Siri
Institutional Area, Hauz Khas,
New Delhi.
(14) Shri Priyadarshi Thakur,
Managing Director,
National Agri.
Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. 1, Siddhart
Enclave, Ashram Chowk, Ring Road, New Delhi.
(15) Shri M.V.S. Chelapathi
Rao,
Managing Director,
NABARD, Mumbai.
(16) M.
Tahir,
Executive Director,
Reserve Bank of India.
Mumbai.
(17) Shri
Sudhir Kumar,
Managing Director,
Small Farmers Agri
Business Consortium (SFAC)
New Delhi.
(18) Shri T.R. Verma,
Director General,
National Institute of Agricultural Marketing,
Kota Road, Bambala,
Near Sanganer, Jaipur
. (19) Shri R. Vishwanathan,
Director,
Planning Commission,
Yojana Bhavan, New Delhi.
(20) Shri P.K. Agarwal,
Agricultural Marketing Adviser,
Directorate of Marketing and Inspection
527,-A, Nirman Bhavan, New
Delhi.
4. The Task Force may invite representatives of selected State
Governments/UT Administrations to participate
in its meetings.
5. The Inter-Ministerial Committee shall submit its Report within a period of three months from the date of
issue of the order.
(M. Senapaty)
Director
(Marketing)
Distribution:
All Members of the Committee (by name) along with a copy of the
"Report of Expert Committee on Strengthening and Developing of
Agriculture Marketing". .
Copy to :
1. PStoAM
2. PS to MaS (A)
3. PS to Secretary (A&C) 4. PS to AS (J)
5. AMA
List of
Groups Constituted by Inter-Ministerial Task Force
1.Group on Legal Reforms
a. Shri R.C.A. Jain, Chairman
Additional Secretary
Department of Agriculture & Cooperation
b. Additional
Secretary Member
Department of Consumer Affairs
c. Agricultural Marketing Adviser, Member
Directorate
of Marketing & Inspection
d. Managing Director, Member
Small
Farmers Agri Business Consortium
e. Executive Director, Member
Reserve Bank
of India
2.Group on Alternative Marketing/Direct
Marketing
a. Shri
D. Tikku Chairman
Managing Director,
National Dairy Development Board
b. Managing
Director, Member
National Horticulture Board
c. Managing
Director, Member
National Cooperative Development Corporation
d. Chairman, Member
Agricultural & Processed Food Products
Export Development Authority
3.Group on Forward & Futures Markets
a. Dr.
Kalyan Raipuria Chairman
Econom ic
Adviser,
Department of Consumer Affairs
b. Chairman,
Member
Forward Markets Commission
c. Managing
Director Member
Small Farmers Agri-Business
Consortium
d. Executive Director Member
Reserve
Bank of India
4.Group on Warehousing Receipts
a. Shri
N.K. Choubey Chairman
Managing Director,
Central Warehousing Corporation
b. Managing Director, Member
Small
Farmers Agri-Business Consortium
c. Managing Director,
National Bank for Agriculture & Rural Member
Development
d. Joint Secretary, Member
Department of
Banking
e. Managing Director, Member
National
Cooperative Development Corporation
5.Group on
Pledge Financing
a. Shri M.V.S. Chelapathi Rao Chairman
Managing
Director,
National Bank for Agriculture & Rural Development
b. Managing Director, Member
National Cooperative
Development Corporation
c. Managing Director, Member
National
Agriculture Cooperative Marketing
Federation
of India Ltd.
d.
Joint Secretary,
Member
Department
of Banking
e. Executive Director, Member
Reserve
Bank of India
6.Group on
Price Support Policy
a. Shri D.K. Trehan Chairman
Economics &
Statistical Adviser, Department of Agriculture &
Cooperation
b. Managing Director, Member
National
Agriculture Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd.
c. Executive Director, Member
Reserve Bank
of India
d. Joint Secretary, Member
Department of
Food & Public Distribution
e.
Member, Member
Commission
for Agricultural Costs and Prices
7.Group on
Market Infrastructure
a. Shri P.K. Mishra, Chairman
Managing
Director,
National Cooperative Development Corporation
b. Managing Director,
Member
National
Dairy Development Board
c. Chairman, Member Agricultural & Processed Food
Products
Exports
Development Authority
d. Managing Director, Member
National
Horticulture Board
e. Managing Director,
Member
National Bank for Agriculture & Rural Development
8.Group on Market Extension Training & Research
a. Shri V. Ramnath Chairman
Director
General,
National Institute of Agricultural Marketing
b Director, Member
Planning
Commission
c. Director General, Member
National
Institute of Agricultural
Extension
Management (MANAGE)
d. Joint Secretary(Ext.), Member
Department of Agriculture &
Cooperation
9.Group on IT in Marketing
a. Shri P.K. Agarwal Chairman
Agricultural
Marketing Adviser,
Directorate of Marketing & Inspection
b Chairman, Member Agricultural
& Processed Food Products
Exports Development Authority
c. Managing Director, Member
National
Bank for Agriculture & Rural Development
d. Director General, Member
National
Institute of Agricultural Marketing
...
INCIDENCE OF MARKET CHARGES
AND TAXATION IN DIFFERENT STATES
|
Sl. No. |
Name
of the State |
Market
fee |
License
fee
Rs. per annum |
Market
charges Rs.
Per unit |
Commission
Charges |
Octroi
|
Sales
Tax |
Remarks |
|
1 |
Andhra
Pradesh |
All commodities-1 %
(
Except fish where it is 0.50 %) |
Traders
–
‘A’--125
‘B’—75
‘C’--50
‘D’--25 |
1.Weighing—0.50
to 0.75
2.Unloading—0.50
to 0.75
3.Brokers
– nil
4.Hamal --0.50 to 0.75
5.Cleaning --0.75 to 1.00
6.Loading
–0.50 to 0.75 |
F&V-4%
Others-
1
to 2 % |
nil |
All Commodities
(
except Maize, Jowar, Ragi, Bajra, Coarse grains) 4
%
|
|
2
|
Arunachal
Pradesh
|
All
commodities –2 % |
Traders--1500
Comm.Ag.—1000
Weighman—200
Hamal—100
|
1.Weighing—nil
2.Unloading—nil
3.Brokers
–nil
4.Hamal --nil
5.Cleaning --nil |
F&V-nil
Others-nil |
nil |
nil
|
|
|
3 |
Assam |
All commodities—1 % |
Traders
–
Rs. 10 |
1.Weighing--
2.Unloading—
3.Brokers
–
4.Hamal --
5.Cleaning --
Markets
are not in operation * |
nil |
nil |
All commodities
(
except rice, wheat, pulm,f&v,fish,gur,atta,
maida etc.)—4 to 8 %
|
* Not collected as markets are not in operation |
|
4 |
Delhi |
F & V--1%
Food
grains—1 % |
Traders
–
‘A’--100
‘B’—100
‘C’—100
‘D’—100
‘E’--50 |
1.Weighing—0.70/bag
2.Unloading—0.70/bag
3.Brokers
–nil
4.Hamal --nil
5.Cleaning --0.40/bag
|
F&V-6 %
Food
grains & Pulses-2.%
Chillies-2.5
% |
nil |
F
& V- nil
Oilseeds-3
%
Methi-7
% |
|
|
5 |
Gujarat |
All commodities-0.5 % |
1.Comm.Agents-Rs.100/annum
2.Traders
‘A’ -75
‘B’-
50
‘C’-
5 to 30 |
1.Weighing
-- 1 to 2.5 depending upon weight of
bag
2.Unloading-- 2.5
3.Brokers--
6
4.Hamal—1/bag
5.Cleaning
--nil |
1.F&V
6%
2.Food
Grains 2% |
0.2
to 4% |
1.Spices
--3%
2.Aniseed--
2%
3.Cotton
--4%
4.
Isabgol—2 %
5.
Cummin—2 %
6.
Ajwain—2 % |
Other agricultural commodities exempted from Sales
tax |
|
6 |
Goa |
All commodities-1 % |
Traders
‘A’ -150
‘B’-
100
‘C’-
50 |
1.Weighing
--
2.Unloading --
3.Brokers
--
4.Hamal --
5.Cleaning 100/Truck |
nil |
nil |
1.Betelnut
--2%
2.Cashewnut
-- 2%
Coconut,
F&V, Cattle & Milk exempted from Sales Tax |
Entry
Fee
Cattle
– Rs.10/head
Vehicle- Rs.10/truck |
|
7 |
Haryana. |
All commodities-2 % |
Traders
–
‘A’--100
‘B’—60
‘C’--20
|
1.Weighing—0.55
2.Unloading—0.40
3.Brokers
–0.16
4.Hamal --1.0
5.Cleaning --0.65
|
F&V-5%
Others-2.50% |
nil |
F&V – nil
Food
grains—4 %
Pulses—4
%
Oilseeds—4
%
|
|
|
8 |
Karnataka
|
1.Food
Grains-1%(advalorum)
2.Livestock-Cattle-Rs.5/head
-Sheep/Goat-Rs1/head
|
1.Traders/Comm.Agents
Rs.200
2.Others
Rs.100
3.Retail
Traders Rs.25 |
1.Weighing
0.50 to 3
2.Unloading
1 to 3
3.Brokers
0.50 to 10
4.Hamal
1 to 3
5.Cleaning
1 to 3 |
1.F&V-
5%
2.Food
Grains- 2% |
nil |
1.Foodgrains-nil
2.Pulses
-2%
3.Oilseeds-4% |
Market fee exempted for Industrial & Export
Purchases. |
|
9 |
Kerala |
There is no fix
rate
|
No
APMC
|
1.Weighing--
2.Unloading—
3.Brokers
–
4.Hamal --
5.Cleaning --
No
APMC
|
nil |
nil |
Rs. 4 to 8 %
|
There is no market regulation and hence no
prescribed charges. |
|
10 |
M.P. |
All commodities-2 % |
Traders
–1000/-anum
Processor-
1000/-anum
|
1.Weighing
2.Unloading
3.Brokers
4.Hamal
5.Cleaning
different
rates in each market |
nil |
nil |
NA
|
Development cess from
traders only – 1 to 5%. |
|
11 |
Maharashtra |
All commodities-0.75-1.0 % |
Traders
–
Rs.3
to 200
Rate
varies from market to market |
1.Weighing—
2.Unloading—
3.Brokers
–
4..Hamal --
5.Cleaning
–
Various
rates in diff. markets |
F&V-7 to
8
%
Others-2
to
4
%
Spices—7
% |
nil |
All agricultural commodities are exempted from
Sales Tax
|
Entry
fee –
Rs.10/truck. |
|
12 |
Meghalaya |
All commodities-1 % |
As
per provision of the Act
|
1.Weighing—nil
2.Unloading—nil
3.Brokers
–nil
4.Hamal --nil
5.Cleaning --nil |
F&V—nil
Others-nil |
nil |
nil
|
|
|
13 |
Nagaland |
All commodities-
2
%
Live
stock-Rs 5/head |
Traders
--100
|
1.Weighing—0.50/Qtl
2.Unloading—5.0/Truck
3.Brokers
–nil
4.Hamal --nil
5.Cleaning --1.0/Truckload
6.
Service charges- 0.50/Qtl
|
F&V-2 %
Others-2
% |
nil |
nil
|
|
|
14 |
Rajasthan |
All commodities—1.60 % |
Traders
–200 Comm.Ag—200
CA
cum Tr--300
|
1.Weighing—1
to 2
2.Unloading—0.50
to 1
3.Brokers
–2
4.Hamal --1 to 4
5.Cleaning --1 to 2
|
F&V-6 %
Others-2
% |
nil |
F & V—nil
Foodgrains—4
%
Pulses
& Oilseeds—2%
Coarse
grains--nil
|
Surcharge
on Sales Tax –15 % |
|
15 |
Tripura |
All commodities-2% |
Traders
–
Rs 20 to 50
|
1.Weighing—2.50
2.Unloading—2.50
3.Brokers
–
4.Hamal --
5.Cleaning --5.00
|
nil |
nil |
Nil (for all agricultural commodities)
|
Entry
fee Rs 1/head |
|
16 |
Uttar Pradesh |
All commodities-2 %+ 0.50 % Development Cess
|
Traders
–Rs. 250
Retailers—
Rs.100 |
1.Weighing—0.50/Qtl
2.Unloading—0.50/Qtl
3.Hamal --1.0/Qtl
4.Cleaning --1.00/Qtl
5
Brokers –0.50 %
|
F&V-3 %
Others-1.50% |
nil |
Foodgrains-4
%
Pulses-2
%
Oilseeds
& Others- 4 %
|
|
|
17 |
West
Bengal |
Cereals—0.50 %
Others—1 % |
Traders
–150
Comm.Ag.--200
|
1.Weighing—
2.Unloading
3.Brokers
–
4.Hamal --5.Cleaning --
No
fixed rates, varies as per local charges for other activities
|
No fixed rates |
nil |
NA |
Purchase
Tax on Jute—4 % |
----
|
1.
|
Andhra Pradesh
|
1.
The
Exhibition
of Price Lists of Goods Order, 1966.
2.
The AP.
Prevention of Hoarding of Foodgrains Order, 1973.
3.
The AP.
Coarsegrains (Requisitioning of Stocks) Order,
1973.
4.
The AP.
Huller Rice Mills (Regulation of Working Hours) Order, 1973.
5.
The AP.
Sheller and Combined Sheller Huller Rice Mills (Non- Trading) Regulation of
Working Hours Order, 1973.
6.
The
A.P. Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution of Card System) Order,
1973.
7.
The
Scheduled Commodities Regulations, 1973.
8.
The
A.P. Catering Establishments (Fixation and Display of Prices of Foodstups) Orders, 1978.
9.
The
A.P. Livestock Feed (Levy & Restriction on Sale) Order, 1981.
10.
The AP.
Scheduled Commodities Dealers (Licensing & Distribution) Order, 1982.
11.
The AP.
Essential Commodities Distribution & Movement (Requisitioning of Vehicles
at Fixed Freight) Order, 1983.
12.
The AP.
Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1984.
13.
The AP.
Petroleum Products (Licensing and regulation of Supplies) Order, 1980.
14.
The AP.
Storage of Essential Commodities (Requisitioning of Godowns) Order, 1986.
|
|
||||||
|
2.
|
Arunachal Pradesh |
1.
The Arunachal Pradesh Motor Spirit/High Speed Diesel (Licensing and
Control) Order, 1992. 2.
The Arunachal Pradesh Public Distribution of Article Order, 1992. 3.
The Arunachal Pradesh declaration of stock and prices of Essential
Commodities Order, 1992.
4.
The Arunachal pradesh Kerosene (Licensing
and Distribution) Control Order,
1992.
. 5.
The Arunachal Pradesh Cooking Gas (Licensing and Distribution) Control
Order, 1992. 6.
The Arunachal Pradesh Food Stuffs (Display of Prices by Catering
Establishment) Order, 1983. 7.
The Arunachal Pradesh Foodgrain (Licensing
and Control) Order, 1984. 8.
Arunachal Pradesh Food Stuff (Hoarding) and (Profiteering) Control
Order, 1989. 9.
Arunachal Pradesh Food Stuff (Distribution)
Control Order, 1980.
|
|
||||||
|
3 |
Assam |
1. The
Assam Public Distribution of Articles Order, 1982.
2. The Assam Paddy and Rice Procurement
(Levy and Licensing) Order, 1995.
3. The
Assam Trade Article (Licensing and Control) Order, 1982. |
|
||||||
|
4. |
Bihar |
1. |
The Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984. |
|
|||||
|
5. |
Chhattisgarh |
1. |
Rice Procurement Levy Policy. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
2. |
Chhattisgarh (Food Stuffs), Public Civil Supply Distribution Scheme, 2001. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
Rest of the Control Orders as in Madhya Pradesh have
been enforced. |
|
|||||
|
6. |
Delhi |
1. |
The Delhi Foodgrains Dealers Licensing Order,
1988. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
2. |
The Delhi Wheat (Licensing & Control) Order,
1996. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
3. |
The Delhi Pulses (Licensing of Dealers) Order,
1974. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
4. |
The Delhi Sugar Dealers Licensing Order, 1963. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
5. |
The Delhi Bread (Licensing of Dealers and
Regulation of Distribution) Order, |
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
1975. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
6. |
The Delhi specified Articles (Regulation of
Distribution) Order, 1981. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
7. |
The Delhi salt (Manufacture, Movement &
Price) Control Order, 1960. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
8. |
The Delhi (Display of Prices and Stocks of
Scheduled Essential Commodities) |
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
Order, 1977. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
9. |
The Delhi Essential Articles (Price Control)
Order, 1977. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
10. |
The Delhi Edible Oils (Procedure for
Identification and Declaration of |
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
Unadulterated stocks) Order, 1998. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
11. |
The Delhi Rice (Levy) Order, 1981. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
12. |
The Delhi Kerosene Oil (Export & price)
Control Order, 1962. |
|
|||||
|
7. |
Goa |
1. |
The Goa, Daman & Diu Controlled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution) |
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
Order 1966. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
2. |
The Goa, Daman & Diu Foodstuff Dealers Licensing Order, 1979. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
3. |
The Goa, Daman & Diu Kerosene Oil (Export and Price) Control Order, 1975. |
|
|||||
|
8. |
Gujarat |
1. |
Gujarat Essential Articles (Licensing, Control and Stock Declaration)
Order, 1981 |
|
|||||
|
|
|
2. |
Gujarat Essential Articles Dealers (Regulation)
Order, 1977. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
3. |
Gujarat Catering Establishment (Display of price
of meals, Refreshment and |
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
Beverages) Order, 1975. |
|
|||||
|
|
4. |
Gujarat Foodstuffs (Regulation of use or Disposal
in sacrifice) Order, 1969. |
|
||||||
|
|
|
5. |
Gujarat Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1984. |
|
|||||
|
9. |
Haryana |
1. |
The Haryana Commodities Price Marking and Display
Order, 1975. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
2. |
Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and
Distribution) Order, 1993. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
3. |
The Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel
(Regulation of Supply and Distribution |
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
and Prevention of Malpractices) Order, 1998. |
|
|||||
|
10. |
Himachal
Pradesh |
1. |
H.P. Coal Licensing and Price Control Order,
1989. |
||||||
|
|
2. |
H.P. Trade Articles (Licensing and Control)
Order, 1981. |
|||||||
|
|
|
3. |
H.P. Specified Essential Commodities (Regulation
and Distribution) Order, 1979. |
||||||
|
|
|
4. |
H.P. Hoarding and profiteering Prevention Order,
1977. |
||||||
|
|
|
5. |
H.P. Commodities Price Marketing and Display
Order, 1977. |
||||||
|
11. |
Jammu |
|
Not reed. |
||||||
|
|
& Kashmir |
|
|
||||||
|
12. |
Jharkhand |
|
Not reed. |
||||||
|
13. |
Karnataka |
1. |
Karnataka Foodstuffs (Display of Prices by
Catering Establishments) Order, |
||||||
|
|
|
|
1983. |
||||||
|
|
|
2. |
Karnataka Essential Commodities Licensing Order,
1986. |
||||||
|
|
|
3. |
Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel (Prevention of
malpractices in Supply and |
||||||
|
|
|
|
Distribution) Order, 1993. |
||||||
|
|
|
4. |
Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public
Distribution System) Control Order, |
||||||
|
|
|
|
1992. |
||||||
|
14. |
Kerala |
1. |
The Kerala Essential Articles Control (Temporary
Powers) Act, 1961. |
||||||
|
|
|
2. |
The Kerala Khandasri/Gur
Dealers' Licensing Order, 1963. |
||||||
|
|
|
3. |
The Kerala Foodgrains Dealers' Licensing Order,
1967. |
||||||
|
|
|
4. |
The Kerala Sugar Dealers' Licensing Order, 1967. |
||||||
|
|
|
5. |
The Kerala Kerosene Control Order, 1968. |
||||||
|
|
|
6. |
The Kerala Pulses Dealers' Licensing Second
Order, 1972. |
||||||
|
|
|
7. |
The Kerala Cotton Textiles (Controlled Cloth)
Dealers' Licensing Order, 1975. |
||||||
|
|
|
8. |
The Kerala Edible Oilseeds, Edible Oils and Babyfood Dealers' Licensing Order, |
||||||
|
|
|
|
1975. |
||||||
|
|
|
9. |
The Ke ral a Tea (Registration of dealers and Declaration of
Stocks) Order, 1983. |
||||||
|
|
|
10. |
The Kerala Rationing Order, 1966. |
||||||
|
15. |
Madhya
Pradesh |
1. |
Madhya Pradesh Essential Commodities (Display and
Regulation of Prices) |
||||||
|
|
|
Order 1977. |
|||||||
|
|
2. |
Madhya Pradesh (Food Stuffs) Pulses Supply
Restriction Scheme, 1991. |
|||||||
|
|
|
3. |
Madhya Pradesh Scheduled Commodities Dealers
(Licensing and Restriction |
||||||
|
|
|
|
on Hoarding) Order, 1991. |
||||||
|
|
|
4. |
Madhya Pradesh Motor Speed and High Speed Diesel
Oil (Licensing and |
||||||
|
|
|
|
Control) Order, 1980. |
||||||
|
|
|
5. |
Madhya Pradesh Kerosene
(Restriction on Use and Maximum Price Control) |
||||||
|
|
|
|
Order, 1993. |
||||||
|
|
|
6. |
Madhya Pradesh Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1970. |
||||||
|
16. |
Maharashtra |
1. |
The Maharashtra Scheduled Articles (Display and
Marking of Prices), Order, |
||||||
|
|
|
|
1966. |
||||||
|
|
|
2. |
The Maharashtra Kerosene Dealers Licensing Order,
1966. |
||||||
|
|
|
3. |
The Maharashtra Foodgrains Rationing (Second)
order, 1966. |
||||||
|
|
|
4. |
The Maharashtra Scheduled Articles (Display of
Stocks and Prices by |
||||||
|
|
|
|
Wholesale Dealers) Order, 1969. |
||||||
|
|
|
5. |
The Maharashtra Scheduled Commodities (Regulation
& Distribution) Order, |
||||||
|
|
|
|
1975. |
||||||
|
|
|
6. |
The Maharashtra Catering Establishments (Display
and Marking of Prices), |
||||||
|
|
|
|
Order, 1977. |
||||||
|
|
|
7. |
The Maharashtra Scheduled Commodities Retail
Dealer's Licensing Order, |
||||||
|
|
|
|
1979. |
||||||
|
|
|
8. |
The Maharashtra Levy Sugar (Regulation &
Distribution) Order, 1981. |
||||||
|
|
|
9. |
The Maharashtra Cattle Fodder (Transport Control)
Order, 1985. |
||||||
|
|
|
10. |
The Maharashtra Scheduled Commodities Wholesale
Dealers Licensing Order, |
||||||
|
|
|
|
1998. |
||||||
|
|
|
11. |
The Maharashtra Sugar & Khandasari
Retail Dealers (Storage Control) Order, |
||||||
|
|
|
|
1992. |
||||||
|
17. |
Manipur |
|
Nil |
||||||
|
18. |
Meghalaya |
1. |
The Meghalaya Cotton Cloth and Yarn Dealers
Licensing Order, 1973. |
||||||
|
|
|
2. |
The Meghalaya Food (Restriction on Service of
Meals by Catering |
||||||
|
|
|
|
Establishments) Order, 1975. |
||||||
|
|
|
3. |
The Meghalaya Foodgrains (Licensing and Control) Order, 1985. |
||||||
|
|
|
4. |
The Meghalaya Food stuff (Distribution) Control
Order, 1976. |
||||||
|
|
|
5. |
The Meghalaya Food stuff (Prohibition of
withholding from sale) Order, 1976. |
||||||
|
|
|
6. |
The Meghalaya Food stuff (Display of prices by
catering establishment) Order, |
||||||
|
|
|
|
1982. |
||||||
|
|
|
7. |
The Meghalaya Guest Control Order, 1973. |
||||||
|
|
|
8. |
The Meghalaya Kerosene (Licensing and
Distribution) Control Order, 1988. |
||||||
|
|
|
9. |
The Meghalaya Liquified
Petroleum Gas (Regulation for sale and Distribution) |
||||||
|
|
|
|
Order, 1988. |
||||||
|
|
|
10. |
The Meghalaya Pulses, Edible Oilseeds and Edible
Oils (Licensing and Control) |
||||||
|
|
|
|
Order, 1979. |
||||||
|
|
|
11. |
The Meghalaya Rice (Prohibition of use of Rice
for distillation of liquor) Order, |
||||||
|
|
|
|
1974. |
||||||
|
|
|
12. |
The Meghalaya Roller Flour Mills and Chakki Mills Wheat-products (ex-mill) |
||||||
|
|
|
|
Price Control Order, 1980. |
||||||
|
|
|
13. |
The Meqhalaya Scheduled
Article (Display and Marketing of Prices Order) |
||||||
|
|
|
|
1975. |
||||||
|
|
|
14. |
The Meghalaya Sugar Dealers Licensing Order,
1973. |
||||||
|
|
|
15. |
The Meghalaya Vanaspati
Dealers Licensing Order, 1974. |
||||||
|
19. |
Mizoram |
|
1.
The Mizoram Trade Articles (Licensing and Control) Order, 1987.
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
2.
The Mizoram Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel (Prevention of
Malpractices in Supply and Distribution) Order, 1992 3.
The Mizoram Guest Control Order, 1987 4.
The Mizoram Food (Restrictions on Service of Meals by Catering
Establishments) Order, 1987.
|
|
||
|
20. |
Nagaland |
|
1. The Nagaland Sugar Dealers Licensing Order, 1966. 2. The Nagaland Foodgrains
Dealers Licensing Order, 1966. 3. The Nagaland Essential
Articles and Foodgrains Dealers (Price Control and Licensing) Order, 1987. 4. The Nagaland Pulses &
Edible Oils (Storage Control) Amendment Order, 1977. 5. The Nagaland Pulses &
Edible Oils (Storage Control) Order, 1977. 6. The Nagaland Pulses, Edible
Oil Seeds and Edible Oils (Dealers Licensing) Order, 1978. 7. The Nagaland Tea
(Registration of Dealers and declaration of stocks) Order, 1978. 8. The Nagaland Foodgrains
(Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1984.
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
21. |
Orissa |
|
10.
The
Orissa Petroleum Products (Sale by Retail Outlets) Order, 1978.
11.
The
Orissa Petroleum Products (Sale by Dealers) Order, 1979.
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
22. |
Punjab |
1. |
The Punjab Hoarding and Profiteering Prevention
Order, 1977. |
|
||
|
|
|
2. |
The Punjab Sugar Khandsari
and Gur Dealers Licensing Order, 1978. |
|
||
|
|
|
3. |
The Punjab Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1983. |
|
||
|
|
|
4. |
The Punjab Regulation of Compounded Cattle Feed,
Concentrate and Mineral |
|
||
|
|
|
|
Mixtures Order, 1988. |
|
||
|
|
|
5. |
The Punjab Trade Articles (Licensing and Control)
Order, 1992. |
|
||
|
|
|
6. |
The Punjab Light Diesel Oil and Kerosene Dealers
Licensing Order, 1978. |
|
||
|
|
|
7. |
The Punjab Cement (Licensing and Control) Order,
1973. |
|
||
|
|
|
8. |
The Punjab Coal Control Order, 1973. |
|
||
|
23. |
Rajasthan
|
1. |
The Rajasthan Foodgrains and other Essential
Articles (Regulation of |
|
||
|
|
|
|
Distribution) Order, 1976. |
|
||
|
|
|
2. |
The Rajasthan Trade Articles (Licensing & Control)
Order, 1980. |
|
||
|
|
|
3. |
The Rajasthan Rice Procurement (Levy) Order,
1985. |
|
||
|
24. |
Sikkim |
1. |
The Sikkim Sugar and Gur
Dealer. Licensing Order, 1977. |
|
||
|
|
|
2. |
The Sikkim Coal Control Order, 1977. |
|
||
|
|
|
3. |
The Sikkim Edible Oils and Pulses Dealers
Licensing Order, 1977. |
|
||
|
|
|
4. |
Rice and Wheat (storage) Control Order, 1992. |
|
||
|
|
|
5. |
Sikkim Key Essential Commodities (Distribution)
Control Order, 1982. |
|
||
|
|
|
6. |
The Sikkim Salt (Manufacture, Distribution &
Movement) Control Order, 1980. |
|
||
|
25. |
Tamil Nadu |
1. |
Tamil Nadu Kerosene (Regulation
of Trade) Order, 1973. |
|
||
|
|
|
2. |
Tamil Nadu Scheduled
Articles (Prescription of Standards) Order, 1977. |
|
||
|
|
|
3. |
Tamil Nadu Essential
Commodities (Display of Stocks and Prices and |
|
||
|
|
|
|
Maintenance of Accounts) Order, 1977. |
|
||
|
|
|
4. |
Tamil Nadu Sugar
(Regulation of Trade) Order, 1981. |
|
||
|
|
|
5. |
Tamil Nadu Paddy
(Restriction on Movement) Order, 1982. |
|
||
|
|
|
6. |
Tamil Nadu Scheduled
Commodity (Regulation of Distribution by Card System) |
|
||
|
|
|
|
Order, 1984. |
|
||
|
|
|
7. |
Tamil Nadu Paddy and
Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1984. |
|
||
|
|
|
8. |
Tamil Nadu Essential
Trade Articles (Regulation of Trade) Order, 1984. |
|
||
|
26. |
Tripura |
1. |
TheTripura
Foodgrains Dealers Licensing Order, 1964. |
|
||
|
|
|
2. |
The Tripura Foodgrains Storage and Sale
(Prohibition) Order, 1965. |
|
||
|
|
|
3. |
The Tripura Foodgrains (Distribution) Control
Order, 1972. |
|
||
|
|
|
4. |
The Tripura Food (Restrictions on Service of
Meals by catering Establishments) |
|
||
|
|
|
|
Order, 1973. |
|
||
|
|
|
5. |
The Tripura Hydrogenated Vegetable Oils Dealers,
Licensing Order, 1967. |
|
||
|
|
|
6. |
The Tripura Cotton, Cloth and Yarn Control Order,
1971. |
|
||
|
|
|
7. |
The Tripura Kerosene Dealers' Licensing Order,
1971. |
|
||
|
|
|
8. |
The Tripura Sugar Dealers' Licensing Order, 1971. |
|||
|
|
|
9. |
The Tripura Essential Commodities (Display of
Stock and Sale Price) Order, |
|||
|
|
|
|
1971. |
|||
|
27. |
Uttaranchal |
|
Same as in Uttar Pradesh |
|||
|
28. |
Uttar |
1. |
The Uttar Pradesh Rice & Paddy (Levy &
Regulation of Trade) Order, 1985. |
|||
|
|
Pradesh |
2. |
The Uttar Pradesh Scheduled Commodities Dealers
(Licensing and Restriction |
|||
|
|
|
|
on Hoarding) Order, 1989. |
|||
|
|
|
3. |
The Uttar Pradesh Kerosene Control Order, 1962. |
|||
|
|
|
4. |
The Uttar Pradesh High Speed Diesel Oil &
Light Diesel Oil (Maintenance of |
|||
|
|
|
|
Supplies & Distribution) Order, 1981. |
|||
|
29. |
West Bengal |
1. |
W.B. Pulses (Storage Control & Dealers'
Licensing) Order, 1999. |
|||
|
|
|
2. |
W.B. Declaration of Stocks and Prices of
Essential Commodities Order, 1977. |
|||
|
|
|
3. |
W.B. Sugar Dealers Licensing Order, 1980. |
|||
|
|
|
4. |
W.B. Rice and Paddy Control, 1997. |
|||
|
|
|
5. |
W.B. Rationing Order, 1964. |
|||
|
|
|
6. |
W.B. Rice Mills (Control and Levy Order), 2000. |
|||
|
|
|
7. |
W.B. Kerosene Control Order, 1968. |
|||
|
|
|
8. |
W.B. Wheat (Storage by Wholesalers and Retailers)
Control Order, 1997. |
|||
|
|
||||||