‘Most farm­ers op­pose cash trans­fer of fer­tiliser sub­sidy’

The Times of India (New Delhi edition) - - Times Nation - Di­[email protected] times­group.com

New Delhi: Nearly 64% of farm­ers are against in­tro­duc­tion of di­rect cash trans­fer (DCT) of fer­tiliser sub­sidy, a sur­vey con­ducted for Niti Aayog has found, pos­ing an ob­sta­cle for the gov­ern­ment’s re­form move in the sec­tor.

The lat­est sur­vey con­ducted by Mi­croSave Con­sult­ing across 54 dis­tricts in 18 states has found that al­though 95.5% of the farm­ers sur­veyed had in­di­vid­ual bank ac­counts, “63.6% of farm­ers said they would not pre­fer DCT in fer­tiliser sub­sidy” and would like to buy them at a sub­sidised price.

Un­der the DCT scheme, the farm­ers need to pay the mar­ket price (de­con­trolled mar­ket) to buy fer­tiliser and then re­ceive cash in their bank ac­counts in­stead of the sub­sidy, which is sim­i­lar to the DCT for sub­sidised LPG cylin­ders. Farm­ers have cited how ei­ther they did not re­ceive their sub­sidy for LPG or it was de­layed. “Due to this ex­pe­ri­ence, farm­ers be­lieved that they would face sim­i­lar is­sues in DCT in fer­tiliser,” the re­port said.

Ac­cord­ing to the re­port, farm­ers said their fi­nan­cial bur­den would in­crease if they had to buy fer­tiliser at the mar­ket price be­cause they would have to bor­row to make the full pay­ment. Fer­tiliser min­istry of­fi­cials said find­ings of the study is the big­gest jinx that they have been try­ing to fix. “The big­gest chal­lenge is how to iden­tify the ben­e­fi­ciary (tiller or the the land-owner), how much should be the sub­sidy amount. Ide­ally, the sub­sidy should be cred­ited in a week,” said an of­fi­cial. New Delhi: The Supreme Court has up­held death sen­tence for a ‘tantrik’ (oc­cultist) cou­ple for killing a two-year-old boy as hu­man sac­ri­fice, al­legedly to ‘pro­pi­ti­ate the God’ in Durg district of Ch­hat­tis­garh.

Terming the grue­some be­head­ing of the boy in 2010 as a ‘rarest of rare’ case de­serv­ing death penalty, a bench of Justices R F Na­ri­man, R Sub­hash Reddy and Surya Kant up­held the or­der of the trial court and the high court.

“In this case, it is clear from the ev­i­dence on record that the main ac­cused, namely, Ish­wari Lal Ya­dav and Ki­ran Bai have com­mit­ted the mur­der of two-year old child Chi­rag as a sac­ri­fice to the God. It is to be no­ticed, they were hav­ing three mi­nor chil­dren at that time. The head of the help­less child was sev­ered, his tongue and cheeks were also cut. The ac­cused didn’t pos­sess ba­sic hu­man­ness and lacked the psy­che or mind­set which can be amenable for any re­for­ma­tion,” the bench said . The court turned down their plea for le­niency and com­mut­ing the death sen­tence to life im­pris­on­ment.

In this case, the boy went miss­ing while play­ing out­side his house. The family mem­bers got sus­pi­cious about their neigh­bour as they found freshly dug earth in the premises. Im­me­di­ately, peo­ple who gath­ered started dig­ging the place where Chi­rag’s body was found.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.