42
noticed from the loan ledgers of the selected farmers. According to the bankers,
the premium was debited from their savings accounts. The other banks are doing
it but not in all cases.
3.29 In Bihar too, although all banks were implanting the crop insurance scheme,
but the bank statements indicated that many a times premium was not debited
to the farmers’ account. In UP, the crop insurance scheme was in operation
except in case of Prathama Bank (RRB) & Syndicate bank in Moradabad district.
The banks indicated that farmers were not very keen to go for crop insurance
since claim settlement was very tardy. As reported, Reliance was the Insurance
provider for Sambhal & Amroha in Moradabad district, which used to return the
insurance premium if the same does not reach to it by 30 June (Kharif) & 31 Dec
(Rabi), despite the issue having been taken up by DLRC.
3.30 Punjab and Arunachal Pradesh are the two states who are not implementing the
crop insurance scheme. It is learnt from the newspapers that Punjab is also not
very happy with the recently announced ‘Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana’
(PMFBY) which is hailed as one of the most farmer-friendly crop insurance
scheme. The PMFBY provides an indemnity level of 90 per cent whereas the
average loss of major crops, wheat and paddy in Punjab is estimated between
two per cent and three per cent and therefore, the farmers of Punjab would not
benefit from this scheme. As per a report (Business Standard, 06 Feb 2016),
i
n
a written submission to the Union ministry of agriculture, the state has sought
the indemnity level to be raised to 95 per cent and the insurance premium to
be scaled down to one per cent from the present level of 2% (kharif) and 1.5%
(Rabi). The state demands that the insurance scheme should cover the produce
lying in market yards, waiting to be bought by agencies.
3.31 In the state of Maharashtra, the crop insurance is being implemented by different
banks in different magnitude. For example, Vidharbha Konkan Gramin Bank
(VKGB) & Central Bank of India were doing crop insurance in Akola and
Sidhudurg but in a varying magnitude. The scrutiny of bank statement of farmers
financed by Bank of India indicated that they had not debited the KCC loan
towards crop insurance premium.
3.32 In Bellary district of Karnataka state
,
Branch Managers informed that they had
collected the premium from farmers in respect of notified crops and forwarded
the same to the concerned Insurance Company. However, the farmers visited/
interacted had not grown the notified crop and hence had not paid insurance
premium. However, the DCCBs (PACS) visited had neither collected the premium
nor sent any amount to the Insurance Company, as farmers had not shown any
interest towards the same and opposed the collection of premium. In Dakshin
Kannada district, none of the banks visited were reported to be implementing the
crop insurance scheme.
3.33.Many bankers indicated that it became very difficult as which crop was to be
insured since only a few crops were notified for crop insurance. So there was
a conflict of interest between the bankers and the borrowers. The borrowers
