Janani Suraksha Yojna




Janani Suraksha Yojna 

The Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY) is a centrally sponsored Scheme which is being implemented with the objective of reducing maternal and infant mortality by promoting institutional delivery among pregnant women.
Under the JSY, eligible pregnant women are entitled for cash assistance irrespective of the age of mother and number of children for giving birth in a government or accredited private health facility.  The scheme focuses on poor pregnant woman with a special dispensation for states that have low institutional delivery rates, namely, the states of Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Bihar, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Assam, Rajasthan, Odisha, and Jammu and Kashmir.  While these States have been named Low Performing States (LPS) under the scheme, the remaining States/UTs have been named High Performing States (HPS).  The scheme also provides performance based incentives to women health volunteers known as ASHA (Accredited Social Health Activist) for promoting institutional delivery among pregnant women. Cash entitlement for different categories of mothers is as follows:

Cash Assistance for Institutional Delivery (in Rs.)
Category
Rural Area
Urban Area

Mother’s package
ASHA’s package*
Mother’s package
ASHA’s package**
LPS
1400
600
1000
400
HPS
700
600
600
400
*ASHA package of Rs. 600 in rural areas include Rs. 300 for ANC component and Rs. 300 for facilitating institutional delivery

**ASHA package of Rs. 400 in urban areas include Rs. 200 for ANC component and Rs. 200 for facilitating institutional delivery

Cash assistance for home delivery

BPL pregnant women, who prefer to deliver at home, are entitled to a cash assistance of Rs. 500 per delivery regardless of the age of pregnant women and number of children.

Direct Benefit Transfer under JSY

Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) mode of payment has been rolled out in 43 districts with effect from 1.1.2013 and in 78 districts from 1.7.2013. Recently, instructions have been issued to all States/UTs regarding extension of DBT mode of payment throughout the country in all districts. Under this initiative, eligible pregnant women are entitled to get JSY benefit directly into their bank accounts.

The details of funds allocated/released and number of women benefitted under JSY during the last three years is given below respectively. State/UT-wise percentage decline in Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) and Maternal Mortality Ratio (MMR) are also given below:-

Statement Showing  SPIP Financial Approval and Utilization under Janani Suraksha Yojana
Rs. In Crore


S. No.
States/ UTs
2014-15

Utilization
SPIP Approval
Utilization (upto 31.03.2015)
A. High Focus States




1
Bihar
314.24
387.15
296.90
2
Chhattisgarh
43.95
60.07
52.95
3
Himachal Pradesh
1.24
2.27
1.28
4
J & K
26.44
28.12
21.67
5
Jharkhand
62.41
86.41
62.40
6
Madhya Pradesh
193.32
189.80
171.55
7
Odhisa
98.28
98.28
97.83
8
Rajasthan
179.97
194.08
183.64
9
Uttar Pradesh
445.79
509.21
441.72
10
Uttarakhand
16.28
19.07
19.48

Sub Total
1381.91
1574.46
1349.42
B. NE States




11
Arunachal Pradesh
1.13
1.82
0.85
12
Assam
94.76
104.94
90.57
13
Manipur
1.88
1.97
2.29
14
Meghalaya
0.72
3.68
2.35
15
Mizoram
1.72
1.88
0.70
16
Nagaland
1.53
1.76
1.21
17
Sikkim
0.28
0.31
0.27
18
Tripura
2.36
2.92
2.52

Sub Total
104.36
119.29
100.75


S. No.
States/ UTs
2014-15

SPIP Approval
Utilization
SPIP Approval
Utilization
C. Non-High Focus States






19
Andhra Pradesh
45.47
36.76
25.10
30.19
20
Telangana


22.83
18.72
21
Goa
0.12
0.08
0.12
0.04
22
Gujarat
35.02
33.06
35.80
34.85
23
Haryana
5.92
7.14
4.33
7.11
24
Karnataka
66.20
54.15
65.85
55.00
25
Kerala
16.08
13.77
13.13
13.72
26
Maharashtra
44.82
45.14
52.64
45.91
27
Punjab
10.43
11.79
11.09
13.67
28
Tamil Nadu
36.02
37.92
52.44
45.30
29
West Bengal
74.44
36.97
59.67
60.46

Sub Total
334.52
276.78
343.01
324.99
D. Small States/UTs





30
Andaman & Nicobar Island
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.05
31
Chandigarh
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.07
32
Dadra & Nagar Haveli
0.14
0.16
0.22
0.23
33
Daman & Diu
0.04
0.01
0.03
0.02
34
Delhi
2.24
0.63
2.30
1.18
35
Lakshadweep
0.08
0.09
0.07
0.09
36
Puducherry
0.35
0.25
0.30
0.23

Sub Total
2.97
1.27
3.06
1.88

Grand Total
2018.97
1764.33
2039.81
1777.04

1)   Note: Above mentioned expenditure figures are as per FMR and hence provisional.  (2) SPIP-State Programme Implementation Plan.  (3) Data pertaining to current financial year, i.e. 2015-16 is not available.

State-wise and year-wise details of number of beneficiaries under
Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY) from 2012-13 to 2014-15
S. No.
Name of States
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15
1
Assam
421359
451748
448143
2
Bihar
1829916
1695843
1531020
3
Chhattisgarh
277653
290276
321762
4
Jharkhand
282169
283562
249455
5
Jammu and Kashmir
127041
143129
116642
6
Madhya Pradesh
979822
1010824
942644
7
Odisha
547648
530089
498046
8
Rajasthan
1072623
1106262
1090012
9
Uttar Pradesh
2186401
2388204
2325010
10
Uttrakhand
89506
95344
100261

Sub Total
7814138
7995281
7622995
11
Andhra Pradesh
341041
383135
261558
12
Goa
1387
1100
828
13
Gujarat
308880
253005
277433
14
Haryana
61902
44076
45742
15
Himachal Pradesh
13626
15766
16182
16
Karnataka
407611
383251
411423
17
Kerala
116816
138527
114677
Sr. No.
Name of States
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15
18
Maharashtra
364039
403405
345761
19
Punjab
79511
96873
103423
20
Tamil Nadu
358224
457770
470003
21
Talangana


135652
22
West Bengal
659996
363655
491356

Sub Total
2713033
2540563
2674038
23
Andaman and Nicobar Islands
298
366
398
24
Chandigarh
449
899
1713
25
Dadra and Nagar Haveli
786
1203
1241
26
Daman and Diu
Not implemented
245
107
27
Delhi
21722
12096
13723
28
Lakshadweep
494
992
1000
29
Pondicherry
3728
3754
3527

Sub Total
27477
19455
21709
30
Arunachal Pradesh
12200
11827
12906
31
Manipur
18145
17064
21667
32
Meghalaya
21082
20151
43334
33
Mizoram
12057
12871
5605
34
Nagaland
17609
13390
16430
35
Sikkim
2668
2383
2278
36
Tripura
18682
15502
17943

Sub Total
102443
93188
120163

Grant Total
10657091
10648487
10438905
Note:

Data pertaining to current financial year, i.e. 2015-16 is not available.

State/UT – wise details for Infant Mortality Rate (IMR)


S. No.
States
Infant Mortality Rate (as per SRS)
Annual decline (%) over previous year


2011
2012
2013
2012
2013

All India
44
42
40
4.5
4.8
1
Andhra Pradesh
43
41
39
4.7
4.9
2
Assam
55
55
54
0.0
1.8
3
Bihar
44
43
42
2.3
2.3
4
Chhattisgarh
48
47
46
2.1
2.1
5
Gujarat
41
38
36
7.3
5.2
6
Haryana
44
42
41
4.5
2.4
7
Jharkhand
39
38
37
2.6
2.6
8
Karnataka
35
32
31
8.6
3.1
9
Kerala
12
12
12
0.0
0.0
10
Madhya Pradesh
59
56
54
5.1
3.6
11
Maharashtra
25
25
24
0.0
4.0
12
Odisha
57
53
51
7.0
1.9
13
Punjab
30
28
26
6.7
7.1
14
Rajasthan
52
49
47
5.8
4.1
15
Tamil Nadu
22
21
21
4.5
0.0
16
Uttar Pradesh
57
53
50
7.0
5.7
17
West Bengal
32
32
31
0.0
3.1
18
Arunachal Pradesh
32
33
32
-3.1
3.0
19
Delhi
28
25
24
10.7
4.0
20
Goa
11
10
9
9.1
10.0
21
Himachal Pradesh
38
36
35
5.3
2.8
22
Jammu and Kashmir
41
39
37
4.9
5.1
23
Manipur
11
10
10
9.1
0.0
24
Meghalaya
52
49
47
5.8
4.1
25
Mizoram
34
35
35
-2.9
0.0
26
Nagaland
21
18
18
14.3
0.0
27
Sikkim
26
24
22
7.7
8.3
28
Tripura
29
28
26
3.4
7.1
29
Uttarakhand
36
34
32
5.6
5.9
30
A & N Islands
23
24
24
-4.3
0.0
31
Chandigarh
20
20
21
0.0
-5.0
32
Dadra & Nagar Haveli
35
33
31
5.7
6.1
33
Daman & Diu
22
22
20
0.0
9.1
34
Lakshadweep
24
24
24
0.0
0.0
35
Puducherry
19
17
17
10.5
0.0
Source: Sample Registration System (SRS), Registrar General of India.
Data pertaining to current year is not available. 


Maternal Mortality Ratio (MMR)
India & Major States
2010-12
2011-13
Drop in MMR
(2010-12)
(2011-13)
% decline in MMR (2010-12) – (2011-13)
India Total
178
167
11
6.2
Assam
328
300
28
8.5
Bihar/Jharkhand
219
208
11
5.0
Madhya Pradesh
/Chhattisgarh
230
221
9
3.9
Odisha
235
222
13
5.5
Rajasthan
255
244
11
4.3
Uttar Pradesh/
Uttarakhand
292
285
7
2.4
Andhra Pradesh
110
92
18
16.4
Karnataka
144
133
11
7.6
Kerala
66
61
5
7.6
Tamil Nadu
90
79
11
12.2
Gujarat
122
112
10
8.2
Haryana
146
127
19
13.0
Maharashtra
87
68
19
21.8
Punjab
155
141
14
9.0
West Bengal
117
113
4
3.4
Source: Registrar General of India (SRS Estimates)
Data pertaining to current year is not available.

The fact that the number of beneficiaries under Janani Surakshsa Yojana has increased manifold i.e. from 7.38 lakh beneficiaries in 2005-06 to 104.38 lakhs in 2014-15, itself is an indicator of high awareness levels among the pregnant women about the scheme.  Also the fact that about 9 lakh ASHA workers get performance based incentives under JSY for motivating pregnant women to give birth in a health facility is an indication of high awareness about the scheme.  Further, out of the total JSY beneficiaries reported in 2014-15, a large majority of (nearly 87%) beneficiaries belong to rural areas. To say that a large segment of pregnant women in the rural areas of the country are not aware of the scheme and are deprived of the benefits under the scheme may not hold true. No irregularities have been reported under this scheme during the said period.

The Health Minister, Shri J P Nadda stated this in a written reply in the Lok Sabha here today.

****
Treatment of Acid Attack Victims

No information on refusal by hospitals to treat acid attack victims is maintained centrally, as health is a state subject. However, as far as the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi; Jawarharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puduchery; three Central Hospitals in Delhi viz. Safdarjung Hospital, Dr. RML Hospital and Lady Hardinge Medical College and Associated Hospitals are concerned, there is no report of refusal for treatment of acid attack victim.

The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has issued a letter dated 02.05.2013 to all State Governments/Union Territories (UTs) with a request to issue necessary instructions to all government and private hospitals in the States/Union Territories to provide free treatment to the acid attack victims as per the provisions of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013. In addition, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has passed an order on 10th April, 2015 in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 129 of 2006 in the matter of Laxmi versus Union of India, inter alia, directing States/UTs to ensure free medical treatment of the acid attack victims, which includes not only provision of physical treatment to the victims but also availability of medicines, bed and food in the hospital concerned. The order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been circulated to all States/UTs to ensure compliance by all concerned.

Further, a pilot programme was initiated in the year 2010 by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare for Prevention of Burns Injuries in three Medical Colleges and six Districts Hospitals of three states. During the 12th Five Year Plan, this Programme is continued with the name “National Programme for Prevention and Management of Burns Injuries (NPPMBI)” for establishing burns units in 67 State Government Medical Colleges and 19 District Hospitals. Under this Programme, the burns units are strengthened for managing burns injury cases including management of acid burns.

A Practical Handbook of Burns Management has been developed for training of medical officers. One of the chapters of this handbook outlines the management of chemical burns including acid and alkali burns and the same has been uploaded on the website of Clinical Establishment Act.

In respect of awareness for prevention and management of acid attack victim, the print material has been developed under the Information Education and Communication component of NPPMBI. This has also been disseminated through outdoor publicity campaign via external train wrapping in five trains during the month of April 2015.

The Health Minister, Shri J P Nadda stated this in a written reply in the Lok Sabha here today.

****

Treatment of Epilepsy

It is estimated that nearly 1/4th of persons suffering from epilepsy may be suitable for epilepsy surgery after an extensive pre-surgical evaluation. This involves a dedicated team work consisting of neurologists (epileptologists), neurosurgeons (epilepsy surgeons), radiologist, neuropsychologist, psychiatrist, nurses, EEG technologists etc.

While health is a state subject, the Government of India supplements the efforts of State Governments to provide health services including for treatment of epilepsy. The Government centers are regularly carrying out such extensive ‘pre-surgical evaluation and epilepsy surgery’ and are located in major cities like Thiruvananthapuram (Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology), New Delhi (All India Institute of Medical Sciences), Bengaluru (NIMHANS), Mumbai (King Edward Memorial Hospital) etc. There are also a few private hospitals performing such procedures in the country.

The Government has taken following steps to overcome the shortage of neurologists:-

i.                    Increase in the number of seats by Medical Council of India in all the centers providing training in Neurology.
ii.                  Establishment of six AIIMS like institutions in the country.
iii.                Approval of Plan Scheme for upgrading two Central Mental Health Institutes to provide Neurology and Neurosurgery services.
iv.                Upgrading State Medical Colleges across the country so that these centers can impart training and services in Neurology.

The Indian Epilepsy Association (IEA) with 26 chapters across India is carrying out such activities - in the community at large and even in schools (School Epilepsy `Awareness Programme). One such programme launched at Bengaluru by Indian Epilepsy Association jointly with NIMHANS is known as “Hope on Wheel Programme” which is working to create awareness, removing the stigma and thereby improve prevention, treatment, care and services for the people with epilepsy.

The Health Minister, Shri J P Nadda stated this in a written reply in the Lok Sabha here today.

****

Rise in Number of Institutional Child Delivery

The institutional deliveries in the country have increased from 38.7% as per the National Family Health Survey (NFHS-III) in 2005-06 to 46.9% as per District Level Household Survey (DLHS-III) in 2007-08. As per the Coverage Evaluation Survey (CES 2009) conducted by the UNICEF, the institutional delivery is 72.9%.

Institutional delivery rates in rural and urban areas were 28.9% and 67.5% respectively as per NFHS-III in 2005-06 which rose to 37.8% and 70.4% as per DLHS–III in 2007-08. Under CES 2009, the rural and urban institutional delivery was 68% and 85.6% respectively. The survey data is not available year wise but provided as per the period of survey. State /UT wise data is given below:-

State /UT wise data on Institutional Delivery


Institutional delivery rates in rural and urban areas were 28.9% and 67.5% respectively as per NFHS-III in 2005-06 which rose to 37.8% and 70.4% as per DLHS–III in 2007-08. Under CES 2009, the rural and urban institutional delivery was 68% and 85.6% respectively. The survey data is not available year wise but provided as per the period of survey. State /UT wise data is given below:-
State /UT wise data on Institutional Delivery


Source: NFHS III (2005-06), DLHS -III (2007-08),  and Coverage Evaluation Survey, UNICEF (CES), 2009 - All India Report
$  The information of Union Territories have been taken from Facts Sheets DLHS III (2007-08)
na = not available
.. NFHS not conducted in Union Territories
.-. Survey was not conducted.
-- The information is respects UTs are Combined in CES


The ASHA plays an important role in improving access to institutional deliveries by motivating the pregnant mother and her family for continued contact with the health system and ensuring at-least  four antenatal check-ups at health facility, spreading awareness on the Janani Shishu Suraksha Karyakram (JSSK),  which entitles all pregnant women delivering in public health institutions to absolutely free and no expense delivery, including caesarean section and  also serving as a support during delivery and post partum care as required. ASHA is incentivized for performing these activities under Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY).

The role of the Auxiliary Nurse Midwives (ANMs) is to conduct regular antenatal visits at the outreach session namely, Village Health and Nutrition Days (VHND) or at the sub-centres, and also to serve as a Skilled Birth Attendant(SBA) in those sub-centres  which are conducting deliveries.

The role of Self Help Groups (SHG) is to get involved in the Village Health, Sanitation and Nutrition Committees, which are expected to support the functions of the ASHA and the ANM, including improving access for women to institutional deliveries.

Under the National Health Mission (NHM), steps taken to increase the institutional delivery rates across the country include the following:-

Promotion of institutional deliveries through Janani Suraksha Yojna.
Janani Shishu Suraksha Karyakram (JSSK) entitles all pregnant women delivering in public health institutions to absolutely free and no expense delivery including Caesarean section. This initiative also provides for free transport from home to institution, between facilities in case of a referral and drop back home. Similar entitlements have been put in place for all sick newborns and sick infants accessing public health institutions for treatment.
Capacity building of health care providers in basic and comprehensive obstetric care.
Operationalization of sub-centres, Primary Health Centres, Community Health Centres and District Hospitals for providing 24x7 basic and comprehensive obstetric care services.
Name Based Tracking of Pregnant Women to ensure antenatal, intranatal and postnatal care.
Mother and Child Protection Card in collaboration with the Ministry of Women and Child Development to monitor service delivery for mothers and children.
Engagement of more than 8.9 lakhs Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs) to generate demand and facilitate accessing of health care services by the community.
Village Health and Nutrition Days in rural areas as an outreach activity which also serves as a platform to promote institutional delivery.


The Health Minister, Shri J P Nadda stated this in a written reply in the Lok Sabha here today.

****

Drug Regulation 


The Government’s attention has been drawn to a working paper series entitled “Poor Quality Drugs and Global Trade A Pilot Study” by Roger Bate and others of the National Bureau of Economic Research, published in September, 2014 which reported that India is supplying substandard medicines for markets with non-existent, under-developed or emerging regulatory oversight, notably Africa. The study is misleading. The extent of actual spurious/adulterated drugs is 0.27, 0.11, 0.16 and 0.11 percent for 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15, respectively.        
Isolated reports of export of sub-standard quality of drugs by some Indian pharmaceutical companies have appeared in the media and on the websites of the regulatory authorities of foreign countries, etc., from time to time. As per the recent media reports, major regulatory actions taken against Indian Pharmaceutical Companies are as under:

1.      M/s. Aarti Drugs, Palghar, Tarapur, Maharashtra by United States Food and Drugs Administration (USFDA).
2.      M/s IPCA Laboratories plants situated at Pithampur, Indore,  Madhya Pradesh  and Piparia in Silvassa by USFDA.
3.      M/s Suchem Laboratories, Ahmedabad by USFDA.
4.      M/s Emcure Pharmaceutical, Hinjawadi by USFDA.

For export of drugs, Indian Pharmaceutical companies are required to comply with the regulatory provisions of the importing country. 

The Government does not have any proposal to disclose data in addition to what is already placed on the website of the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization. The Department of Commerce has conducted a study on Pharmaceuticals Inspection Cooperation Scheme (PICS). However, no decision has been taken by the Government to join PICS.

The Health Minister, Shri J P Nadda stated this in a written reply in the Lok Sabha here today.

****

Funds for BPL Cancer Patients 

The Health Minister’s Cancer Patient Fund (HMCPF) has been established within Rashtriya Arogya Nidhi (RAN) which has a separate corpus fund. An amount of Rs. 100.00 crore has been placed in the corpus fund and the earnings from the Corpus Fund accruing out of interest are utilized for providing financial assistance to cancer patients, through 27 Regional Cancer Centres (RCC) located all over India. Revolving Funds have been set up in these RCCs by placing an amount up to Rs. 50 lakh for providing financial assistance for treatment up to Rs. 2 lakh in individual cases. Cases involving expenditure over and above Rs. 2 lakh are referred to the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare.

The details of funds released to 27 Regional Cancer Centres (RCCs) State/UT wise from HMCPF for last three years and current year are given below:-

Details of funds released to States/ UTs under Health Minister’s Cancer Patient Fund (HMCPF) during last three years and current year and number of patients benefitted*:



*As per utilization received.

Presently financial assistance under HMCPF is extended to patients living below poverty line as fixed by the erstwhile Planning Commission, so as to provide assistance to the more vulnerable sections of the population.

The National Cancer Registry Programme of Indian Council of Medical Research aims at generating reliable data on magnitude and patterns of cancer.

The Health Minister, Shri J P Nadda stated this in a written reply in the Lok Sabha here today.

****

Bio-Medical Waste 

 

The details of quantum of bio-medical wastes generation in the country during 2011, 2012 and 2013, as per information provided by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) are given below:-

                                                                                                                        (in kg/day)

Year
2011
2012
2013
Bio-medical Waste Generation
4,15,429
4,16,824
4,84,271
 

The Government of India has promulgated Bio-medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 (BMW Rules) under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 for ensuring environmentally sound management of bio-medical waste generated in the country. Further, Government of India amended the said rules in the year 2000 and 2003. Rule 5 (1) of the BMW Rules, stipulates that “Bio-medical Waste shall be treated and disposed of in accordance with Schedule I and in compliance with the standards prescribed in Schedule V.  Also, Rule 5 (2) of the BMW Rules stipulates that “every occupier, where required shall set up in accordance with the time-schedule in Schedule VI, requisite bio-medical waste treatment facilities like incinerator, autoclave, microwave system for the treatment of waste or ensure requisite treatment of waste at a common waste treatment facility or any other waste treatment facility”.

As per the Annual Report 2013 submitted by the State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs)/ Pollution Control Committees (PCCs) and Directorate General Armed Forces Medical Services (DGAFMS),  22,245 Health Care Facilities (HCFs) are having on-site treatment facilities apart from 198 Common Bio-Medical Waste Treatment Facility (CBWTFs) providing treatment services to the 1,31,837 HCFs.

As per the information provided by CPCB, during the period January 2014 to May 2015, 18 complaints have been received by them, which  were forwarded to the SPCBs/PCCs concerned to examine the issues raised by the complainant and to take action in light of the Bio-medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 as amended.

Apart from notification of Bio-medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986,   various steps have been taken by CPCB for ensuring proper management of bio-medical waste in the Country-

(i) Issuing of Manual on ‘Bio-medical Waste Management’;

(ii) Issuing of Guidelines on “Common Bio-medical Waste Treatment Facilities”;

(iii) Development and circulation of Guidelines on “Design and Construction of Bio-medical Waste Incinerator”;

(iv) Issuing of Guidelines for disposal of bio-medical waste generated during the Universal Immunization Programme (UIP).

(v) Issuing of Guidelines for management and handling of mercury waste generated from the health care facilities.

Besides, regular interaction meets are organized by CPCB with the SPCBs, PCCs, DGAFMS and the CBWTF Operators for effective enforcement of the BMW Rules. 

To encourage setting up of common treatment facilities for bio‑medical wastes, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) provides 25 % of the total project cost as financial assistance for setting up of Common Bio-medical Waste Treatment and Disposal Facility (CBWTFs) for bio-medical waste, on Public Private Partnership (PPP) basis. In the case of North - Eastern States, up to 50 % of the total project cost is provided as central assistance subject to 25 % of the project cost is contributed by the State Government concerned and the balance 25 % of the project cost is contributed by the entrepreneur. The central assistance is limited to a maximum of Rs. 1 crore. In case of North-East States, the central assistance is limited to a maximum of Rs. 2 crore.

The Health Minister, Shri J P Nadda stated this in a written reply in the Lok Sabha here today.
 
*****
Janani Suraksha Yojna Janani Suraksha Yojna Reviewed by Ajit Kumar on 3:25 PM Rating: 5

No comments:

Powered by Blogger.