TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill View
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Haryana: Agriculture team inspects fertiliser shop, finds discrepancies in stock

Owner had illegally sublet licence
Photo for representation only. iStock

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

A team of the Haryana Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department has found discrepancies in the stock of agriculture grade subsidised urea of a trading company (a retail licensee of fertiliser) in the district.

Advertisement

The team also found that the licensee had illegally sublet his licence for running the fertiliser shop to another person.

Advertisement

On the complaint of Ajay Kumar, Sub-Divisional Agriculture Officer, Jagadhri, a case was registered against Javed and his firm under the Essential Commodities Act, the Fertiliser (Control) Order and the BNS.

As per information, on the directions of the Deputy Director of Agriculture (DDA), Yamunanagar, Aditya Pratap Dabas, a team headed by the Sub-Divisional Agriculture Officer, Jagadhri, Ajay Kumar, carried out an inspection at a trading company on August 23.

The team found that the licensee had sublet the licence for running the fertiliser shop to another person on a monthly rent basis, in violation of Clause 8 of the Fertiliser (Control) Order.

Advertisement

The team also found discrepancies in the stock. The actual stock was 743 bags of urea, however, there were 852 bags in the stock register and 848 bags in the record of point-of-sale (POS) machine, indicating manipulation and wrong entries.

“It was found that the shop was being operated by a tenant on a monthly rental basis instead of the actual licence holder. This is an unauthorised and illegal activity,” said Dabas.

Advertisement
Tags :
#AgriculturalFraud#AgricultureInspection#EssentialCommoditiesAct#FertilizerControlOrder#FertilizerScandal#FertilizerShop#IllegalSubletting#UreaShortageHaryanaAgricultureYamunanagarNews
Show comments
Advertisement