Thumbnail Image

Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Pusa

In the imperial Gazetteer of India 1878, Pusa was recorded as a government estate of about 1350 acres in Darbhanba. It was acquired by East India Company for running a stud farm to supply better breed of horses mainly for the army. Frequent incidence of glanders disease (swelling of glands), mostly affecting the valuable imported bloodstock made the civil veterinary department to shift the entire stock out of Pusa. A British tobacco concern Beg Sutherland & co. got the estate on lease but it also left in 1897 abandoning the government estate of Pusa. Lord Mayo, The Viceroy and Governor General, had been repeatedly trying to get through his proposal for setting up a directorate general of Agriculture that would take care of the soil and its productivity, formulate newer techniques of cultivation, improve the quality of seeds and livestock and also arrange for imparting agricultural education. The government of India had invited a British expert. Dr. J. A. Voelcker who had submitted as report on the development of Indian agriculture. As a follow-up action, three experts in different fields were appointed for the first time during 1885 to 1895 namely, agricultural chemist (Dr. J. W. Leafer), cryptogamic botanist (Dr. R. A. Butler) and entomologist (Dr. H. Maxwell Lefroy) with headquarters at Dehradun (U.P.) in the forest Research Institute complex. Surprisingly, until now Pusa, which was destined to become the centre of agricultural revolution in the country, was lying as before an abandoned government estate. In 1898. Lord Curzon took over as the viceroy. A widely traveled person and an administrator, he salvaged out the earlier proposal and got London’s approval for the appointment of the inspector General of Agriculture to which the first incumbent Mr. J. Mollison (Dy. Director of Agriculture, Bombay) joined in 1901 with headquarters at Nagpur The then government of Bengal had mooted in 1902 a proposal to the centre for setting up a model cattle farm for improving the dilapidated condition of the livestock at Pusa estate where plenty of land, water and feed would be available, and with Mr. Mollison’s support this was accepted in principle. Around Pusa, there were many British planters and also an indigo research centre Dalsing Sarai (near Pusa). Mr. Mollison’s visits to this mini British kingdom and his strong recommendations. In favour of Pusa as the most ideal place for the Bengal government project obviously caught the attention for the viceroy.

Browse

20181
Reset filters
Subject: Family Resource Management × Author: Kumari, Supriya × End date: 2019 × Start date: 2016 ×
Reset filters

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    ThesisItemOpen Access
    Use of Modern Household Equipment Among The Working And Non-Working Women In Samastipur District of Bihar-A Comparative Study.
    (Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Pusa, Samastipur, 2018) Kumari, Supriya; Bala, Shivani
    Household equipments are the important equipments which are used in our day to day household activities like cooking, cleaning, exercising, purifying, food preservation etc. Now a day life has become busier as compared to earlier days. Both male and female are engaged in earning to meet their daily needs. That is why they need modern, fast and easy equipment which can save their time and energy. The study was conducted in Samastipur district of Bihar. Samastipur was selected purposively, as this type of study on women’s was not undertaken in this area. A sample of 60 women ‘s (Working and non working ) were selected randomly, to study the socio-economic profile of the women , extent of use, source of availability and time saving, problem faced in buying and using equipments by the respondents. The independent variables included personal, demographic and socio-economic factors, whereas extent of use and source of availability were taken as dependent variables. Data were collected with the help of well structured schedule by interviewing the respondents. Appropriate statistical were tests like frequencies,percentages, coefficient of correlation, regression coefficients were computed. Background profile of the respondents showed that majority of the working women (60%) were under middle age group whereas nonworking women (43.3%) came under old age group. Working respondents (73.3%) were Graduate & above, whereas, nonworking women’s (43.3%) had education up to intermediate level. All the respondents were married.In case of working women majority (63.3%) were engaged in government job and 36.7 % were doing private job. All the respondents were of general caste and the type of family was observed nuclear family for working women and nonworking womenbelonged to joint family, In case of family size maximum number of working respondents belonged to small family size whereas, non working having medium size of family. In case of annual family income, working respondents (43.3%) were found in income group of Rs 1, 00001 -3, 00000,whereas, nonworking respondents (53.3%) were having per annum income up to one lakh. Most of the working women (90%) and non working (66.7%) were observed that they did not have any social participation. only a meager number i.e. one working women was found a member of self help group and only seven non working respondents were member of same organization. Majority (80%) non working and 66.7 percent working women were found to use TV/radio as source of information. The study revealed that an important household item which was used by all the working respondents (100%) and about 93.3%bynon working respondents wasmixer followed by electric iron about (60%) working respondents washing machine. 33.3 percent non working women were found using washing machine. It was assessed that all of the respondents were using TV, inverter, gas stove and pressure cooker. In case of using peeler (93.3%) working respondents were found using this household item whereas in case of non working women it was observed 73.3%. With respect to use of grater by respondent it was assessed that working women were 86.7% and non working women 70%, respectively. About extent of use of household equipments majority of the (76.7%) working respondents werefoundalwaysusing mixer and non working women were assessed about 63.3% whereas, electric blender was found minimum in use by both of the respondents. Correlation analysis was applied to assess the relation between extent of use of household equipments and the socio-demographic conditions of the respondents. The result revealed that education and family income were found negative and significant correlationwith extent of use of modern equipments further, it was noticed that household equipments had positive and significant relation with extent of use of modern equipments in case of working women. The same trend was observed in case of non-working women. The correlation coefficient between dependent variables source of availability modern household equipments of working and non working women with selected independent variables revealed that social participation had negative and significant correlationwhile in case ofnon working women family type was found to be negatively significant at 5%probability level, and family size of respondent was alsoassessed to be negatively significant 1% probability level whereas, source of information utilized was found to be highly significant at 1% probability level. In the study it was also noticed that both types of respondent faced financial problems for buying and using modern household equipments. The other problems were duplicate equipment available in the market. In using electrical appliances erratic electric supply was identified as major problems and lack of space in their houses.The study revealed that use of modern household equipments of day to day workload of homemaker has been found important these days because there is an increased demand on the available resource of women who perform dual role at work at home. These equipments play an important role in improving the physical quality of life by making time consuming and difficult household chores easier. For a homemaker the modern household equipments are those devices which are time and energy saving and help in improving the quality of life. By considering these factors along with the findings and application of work study, a homemaker can be complete more work in less time with minimum efforts.