__________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.a)Ministry of Home Affairsb)Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilisersc)Ministry of Health and Family Welfared)Ministry of Social Justice and Empowermente)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

Banking Exams Exam > Banking Exams Questions > __________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Muk...

a)
Ministry of Home Affairs
b)
Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilisers
c)
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
d)
Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment
e)
None of the above

Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Most Upvoted Answer

__________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) ...

Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.

Answered by Notes Wala · View profile

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for Banking Exams exam

Similar Banking Exams Doubts

Directions: Read the following passage carefully to answer the given question.The Government of India has tried to assure a reasonable return to fertiliser industry so that indigenous production can keep pace with the projected increase in demand of fertilisers. At the same time the farmers have also been assured of a reasonable price so that fertiliser use can be encouraged. The Government efforts to meet the twin policy objectives have resulted in a substantial increase in domestic production as well as consumption of fertiliser but at the same time they have also resulted in an increase in subsidy on fertilisers. A proposal was made to increase the price of fertiliser by 40 percent, and this was subsequently reduced to 30 per cent, except in the case of small and marginal farmers where no increase has been envisaged. The impact on the over all cost of cultivation ranging between 0.1 per cent in case of paddy in Assam to highest of 5.25 in case of wheat in West Bengal, depending on the cropping pattern and level of use of fertilisers. The concern now is (i) whether the price increase will reduce the absolute level of consumption of fertilisers and/or, (ii) whether it will cut down the rate of growth of fertiliser consumption, which is necessary for achieving the food and fibre production?Regarding the issue of price elasticity of fertiliser's demand and output response to price change of fertilisers, the recent studies do not give a consistent pattern of output response to price change. The estimated elasticities of rice and wheat are not consistent when time series regression analysis and yield response functions are used. Further, the bias in the selection of elasticities renders them undependable to draw any general conclusions.Besides, relative price movements are expected to be lower in controlled markets than in free markets and hence the estimated elasticities would be upwardly biased when compared with the true demand elasticities.On the other hand, it is argued that price variable is having a limited variation while demand and supply factors determine the actual use of fertiliser by farmers. One can, however, legitimately expect that the increased prices of fertiliser would remove some of the inefficiencies in its use, but this would be limited to those high fertiliser consuming regions. It is noted that in terms of total production, the developed regions still hold the key as the levels of productivity are much higher in these regions when compared to backward regions. Therefore, high fertiliser prices may not affect the output to the extent it is feared. Thus, on the whole, the removal of subsidies may work out to be partially beneficial.An immediate cut in subsidy may (i) trigger the domestic inflation rate which is already conspicuous and (ii) make our agricultural products less competitive in the international markets. The latter may defeat our new export-oriented policies, while the former leads to social unrest. However, the protagonists of new policies perceive these problems as of short run nature. Though the final results of these policies are expected to take 2–3 years to materialise, at the moment these changes are causing ripples in the economy.Given the dominance of small and marginal farmer in the agricultural sector, the fact that the consumption of plant nutrients declined by 8.2 per cent for small farms while it has increased by 6.5 per cent on large farms, when fertiliser prices went up by 38 per cent, is a matter of concern. It shows that the small farmers are the first victims of the cut in these subsidies, at least in the short run. The main problems faced by these farmers are two–fold:Given their low marketable surpluses and lack of capacity to withhold the stocks, they are not in a position to avail the higher output prices which can compensate for higher input prices. Even if they are in a position to do so, the low level of resources availability during the crop season may force them to cut down fertiliser use. This, in turn, would result in decline in productivity and hence marketable surplus.Their subsistence nature would result in paying higher amounts for their consumption needs in the event of an increase in input prices. Therefore, the removal of subsidies may further intensify their non–viability. The pattern of growth in agricultural sector in the new technology phase has created chronic regional imbalances. Part of this can certainly be attributed to the region–specific structural characteristics, but none can deny the failure of policies in minimising the gap between regions. Among the various policy instruments, input subsidies should have been used carefully towards this purpose. If the production performance was regionally even and robust to withstand the reduction in input intensity, then there would have been a case to withdraw the input subsidies.Indian agriculture has always been a very unequal affair. Even before colonisation, there was rampant inequality arising from the feudal structures of agriculture and regional differences. Under British rule many of these inequalities were further exacerbated through heavy taxation of even the smallest farmer. Despite half a century of independence, these inequalities are still getting worse. The arrival of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund strengthened the hand of those within the Indian government who believe that export–oriented agriculture and free trade would 'lift all ships' out of poverty despite the lack of evidence that this has worked in India.Therefore, it is clear that the inequalities in farm sector would not only continue but may tend to widen in the changing scenario. Similarly, the inequalities between developed and backward regions would also increase as the latter, besides being burdened with the price rise, also suffer from inefficient usage of fertiliser consequent to the adverse climatic conditions and lack of resources.Q. Which of the following statements is/are true?

View answer

Directions: Read the following passage carefully to answer the given question.The Government of India has tried to assure a reasonable return to fertiliser industry so that indigenous production can keep pace with the projected increase in demand of fertilisers. At the same time the farmers have also been assured of a reasonable price so that fertiliser use can be encouraged. The Government efforts to meet the twin policy objectives have resulted in a substantial increase in domestic production as well as consumption of fertiliser but at the same time they have also resulted in an increase in subsidy on fertilisers. A proposal was made to increase the price of fertiliser by 40 percent, and this was subsequently reduced to 30 per cent, except in the case of small and marginal farmers where no increase has been envisaged. The impact on the over all cost of cultivation ranging between 0.1 per cent in case of paddy in Assam to highest of 5.25 in case of wheat in West Bengal, depending on the cropping pattern and level of use of fertilisers. The concern now is (i) whether the price increase will reduce the absolute level of consumption of fertilisers and/or, (ii) whether it will cut down the rate of growth of fertiliser consumption, which is necessary for achieving the food and fibre production?Regarding the issue of price elasticity of fertiliser's demand and output response to price change of fertilisers, the recent studies do not give a consistent pattern of output response to price change. The estimated elasticities of rice and wheat are not consistent when time series regression analysis and yield response functions are used. Further, the bias in the selection of elasticities renders them undependable to draw any general conclusions.Besides, relative price movements are expected to be lower in controlled markets than in free markets and hence the estimated elasticities would be upwardly biased when compared with the true demand elasticities.On the other hand, it is argued that price variable is having a limited variation while demand and supply factors determine the actual use of fertiliser by farmers. One can, however, legitimately expect that the increased prices of fertiliser would remove some of the inefficiencies in its use, but this would be limited to those high fertiliser consuming regions. It is noted that in terms of total production, the developed regions still hold the key as the levels of productivity are much higher in these regions when compared to backward regions. Therefore, high fertiliser prices may not affect the output to the extent it is feared. Thus, on the whole, the removal of subsidies may work out to be partially beneficial.An immediate cut in subsidy may (i) trigger the domestic inflation rate which is already conspicuous and (ii) make our agricultural products less competitive in the international markets. The latter may defeat our new export-oriented policies, while the former leads to social unrest. However, the protagonists of new policies perceive these problems as of short run nature. Though the final results of these policies are expected to take 2–3 years to materialise, at the moment these changes are causing ripples in the economy.Given the dominance of small and marginal farmer in the agricultural sector, the fact that the consumption of plant nutrients declined by 8.2 per cent for small farms while it has increased by 6.5 per cent on large farms, when fertiliser prices went up by 38 per cent, is a matter of concern. It shows that the small farmers are the first victims of the cut in these subsidies, at least in the short run. The main problems faced by these farmers are two–fold:Given their low marketable surpluses and lack of capacity to withhold the stocks, they are not in a position to avail the higher output prices which can compensate for higher input prices. Even if they are in a position to do so, the low level of resources availability during the crop season may force them to cut down fertiliser use. This, in turn, would result in decline in productivity and hence marketable surplus.Their subsistence nature would result in paying higher amounts for their consumption needs in the event of an increase in input prices. Therefore, the removal of subsidies may further intensify their non–viability. The pattern of growth in agricultural sector in the new technology phase has created chronic regional imbalances. Part of this can certainly be attributed to the region–specific structural characteristics, but none can deny the failure of policies in minimising the gap between regions. Among the various policy instruments, input subsidies should have been used carefully towards this purpose. If the production performance was regionally even and robust to withstand the reduction in input intensity, then there would have been a case to withdraw the input subsidies.Indian agriculture has always been a very unequal affair. Even before colonisation, there was rampant inequality arising from the feudal structures of agriculture and regional differences. Under British rule many of these inequalities were further exacerbated through heavy taxation of even the smallest farmer. Despite half a century of independence, these inequalities are still getting worse. The arrival of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund strengthened the hand of those within the Indian government who believe that export–oriented agriculture and free trade would 'lift all ships' out of poverty despite the lack of evidence that this has worked in India.Therefore, it is clear that the inequalities in farm sector would not only continue but may tend to widen in the changing scenario. Similarly, the inequalities between developed and backward regions would also increase as the latter, besides being burdened with the price rise, also suffer from inefficient usage of fertiliser consequent to the adverse climatic conditions and lack of resources.Q. Among the problems faced by small farmers is/are

View answer

Directions: Read the following passage carefully to answer the given question.The Government of India has tried to assure a reasonable return to fertiliser industry so that indigenous production can keep pace with the projected increase in demand of fertilisers. At the same time the farmers have also been assured of a reasonable price so that fertiliser use can be encouraged. The Government efforts to meet the twin policy objectives have resulted in a substantial increase in domestic production as well as consumption of fertiliser but at the same time they have also resulted in an increase in subsidy on fertilisers. A proposal was made to increase the price of fertiliser by 40 percent, and this was subsequently reduced to 30 per cent, except in the case of small and marginal farmers where no increase has been envisaged. The impact on the over all cost of cultivation ranging between 0.1 per cent in case of paddy in Assam to highest of 5.25 in case of wheat in West Bengal, depending on the cropping pattern and level of use of fertilisers. The concern now is (i) whether the price increase will reduce the absolute level of consumption of fertilisers and/or, (ii) whether it will cut down the rate of growth of fertiliser consumption, which is necessary for achieving the food and fibre production?Regarding the issue of price elasticity of fertiliser's demand and output response to price change of fertilisers, the recent studies do not give a consistent pattern of output response to price change. The estimated elasticities of rice and wheat are not consistent when time series regression analysis and yield response functions are used. Further, the bias in the selection of elasticities renders them undependable to draw any general conclusions.Besides, relative price movements are expected to be lower in controlled markets than in free markets and hence the estimated elasticities would be upwardly biased when compared with the true demand elasticities.On the other hand, it is argued that price variable is having a limited variation while demand and supply factors determine the actual use of fertiliser by farmers. One can, however, legitimately expect that the increased prices of fertiliser would remove some of the inefficiencies in its use, but this would be limited to those high fertiliser consuming regions. It is noted that in terms of total production, the developed regions still hold the key as the levels of productivity are much higher in these regions when compared to backward regions. Therefore, high fertiliser prices may not affect the output to the extent it is feared. Thus, on the whole, the removal of subsidies may work out to be partially beneficial.An immediate cut in subsidy may (i) trigger the domestic inflation rate which is already conspicuous and (ii) make our agricultural products less competitive in the international markets. The latter may defeat our new export-oriented policies, while the former leads to social unrest. However, the protagonists of new policies perceive these problems as of short run nature. Though the final results of these policies are expected to take 2–3 years to materialise, at the moment these changes are causing ripples in the economy.Given the dominance of small and marginal farmer in the agricultural sector, the fact that the consumption of plant nutrients declined by 8.2 per cent for small farms while it has increased by 6.5 per cent on large farms, when fertiliser prices went up by 38 per cent, is a matter of concern. It shows that the small farmers are the first victims of the cut in these subsidies, at least in the short run. The main problems faced by these farmers are two–fold:Given their low marketable surpluses and lack of capacity to withhold the stocks, they are not in a position to avail the higher output prices which can compensate for higher input prices. Even if they are in a position to do so, the low level of resources availability during the crop season may force them to cut down fertiliser use. This, in turn, would result in decline in productivity and hence marketable surplus.Their subsistence nature would result in paying higher amounts for their consumption needs in the event of an increase in input prices. Therefore, the removal of subsidies may further intensify their non–viability. The pattern of growth in agricultural sector in the new technology phase has created chronic regional imbalances. Part of this can certainly be attributed to the region–specific structural characteristics, but none can deny the failure of policies in minimising the gap between regions. Among the various policy instruments, input subsidies should have been used carefully towards this purpose. If the production performance was regionally even and robust to withstand the reduction in input intensity, then there would have been a case to withdraw the input subsidies.Indian agriculture has always been a very unequal affair. Even before colonisation, there was rampant inequality arising from the feudal structures of agriculture and regional differences. Under British rule many of these inequalities were further exacerbated through heavy taxation of even the smallest farmer. Despite half a century of independence, these inequalities are still getting worse. The arrival of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund strengthened the hand of those within the Indian government who believe that export–oriented agriculture and free trade would 'lift all ships' out of poverty despite the lack of evidence that this has worked in India.Therefore, it is clear that the inequalities in farm sector would not only continue but may tend to widen in the changing scenario. Similarly, the inequalities between developed and backward regions would also increase as the latter, besides being burdened with the price rise, also suffer from inefficient usage of fertiliser consequent to the adverse climatic conditions and lack of resources.Q. Higher fertiliser prices may not affect output because

View answer

Directions: Read the following passage carefully to answer the given question.The Government of India has tried to assure a reasonable return to fertiliser industry so that indigenous production can keep pace with the projected increase in demand of fertilisers. At the same time the farmers have also been assured of a reasonable price so that fertiliser use can be encouraged. The Government efforts to meet the twin policy objectives have resulted in a substantial increase in domestic production as well as consumption of fertiliser but at the same time they have also resulted in an increase in subsidy on fertilisers. A proposal was made to increase the price of fertiliser by 40 percent, and this was subsequently reduced to 30 per cent, except in the case of small and marginal farmers where no increase has been envisaged. The impact on the over all cost of cultivation ranging between 0.1 per cent in case of paddy in Assam to highest of 5.25 in case of wheat in West Bengal, depending on the cropping pattern and level of use of fertilisers. The concern now is (i) whether the price increase will reduce the absolute level of consumption of fertilisers and/or, (ii) whether it will cut down the rate of growth of fertiliser consumption, which is necessary for achieving the food and fibre production?Regarding the issue of price elasticity of fertiliser's demand and output response to price change of fertilisers, the recent studies do not give a consistent pattern of output response to price change. The estimated elasticities of rice and wheat are not consistent when time series regression analysis and yield response functions are used. Further, the bias in the selection of elasticities renders them undependable to draw any general conclusions.Besides, relative price movements are expected to be lower in controlled markets than in free markets and hence the estimated elasticities would be upwardly biased when compared with the true demand elasticities.On the other hand, it is argued that price variable is having a limited variation while demand and supply factors determine the actual use of fertiliser by farmers. One can, however, legitimately expect that the increased prices of fertiliser would remove some of the inefficiencies in its use, but this would be limited to those high fertiliser consuming regions. It is noted that in terms of total production, the developed regions still hold the key as the levels of productivity are much higher in these regions when compared to backward regions. Therefore, high fertiliser prices may not affect the output to the extent it is feared. Thus, on the whole, the removal of subsidies may work out to be partially beneficial.An immediate cut in subsidy may (i) trigger the domestic inflation rate which is already conspicuous and (ii) make our agricultural products less competitive in the international markets. The latter may defeat our new export-oriented policies, while the former leads to social unrest. However, the protagonists of new policies perceive these problems as of short run nature. Though the final results of these policies are expected to take 2–3 years to materialise, at the moment these changes are causing ripples in the economy.Given the dominance of small and marginal farmer in the agricultural sector, the fact that the consumption of plant nutrients declined by 8.2 per cent for small farms while it has increased by 6.5 per cent on large farms, when fertiliser prices went up by 38 per cent, is a matter of concern. It shows that the small farmers are the first victims of the cut in these subsidies, at least in the short run. The main problems faced by these farmers are two–fold:Given their low marketable surpluses and lack of capacity to withhold the stocks, they are not in a position to avail the higher output prices which can compensate for higher input prices. Even if they are in a position to do so, the low level of resources availability during the crop season may force them to cut down fertiliser use. This, in turn, would result in decline in productivity and hence marketable surplus.Their subsistence nature would result in paying higher amounts for their consumption needs in the event of an increase in input prices. Therefore, the removal of subsidies may further intensify their non–viability. The pattern of growth in agricultural sector in the new technology phase has created chronic regional imbalances. Part of this can certainly be attributed to the region–specific structural characteristics, but none can deny the failure of policies in minimising the gap between regions. Among the various policy instruments, input subsidies should have been used carefully towards this purpose. If the production performance was regionally even and robust to withstand the reduction in input intensity, then there would have been a case to withdraw the input subsidies.Indian agriculture has always been a very unequal affair. Even before colonisation, there was rampant inequality arising from the feudal structures of agriculture and regional differences. Under British rule many of these inequalities were further exacerbated through heavy taxation of even the smallest farmer. Despite half a century of independence, these inequalities are still getting worse. The arrival of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund strengthened the hand of those within the Indian government who believe that export–oriented agriculture and free trade would 'lift all ships' out of poverty despite the lack of evidence that this has worked in India.Therefore, it is clear that the inequalities in farm sector would not only continue but may tend to widen in the changing scenario. Similarly, the inequalities between developed and backward regions would also increase as the latter, besides being burdened with the price rise, also suffer from inefficient usage of fertiliser consequent to the adverse climatic conditions and lack of resources.Q. One of the reasons behind the government's decision to review the policy on subsidy on fertilisers is to

View answer

Study the following information carefully to answer the questions: B, D, H, K, P, R and T are seven friends who studied in three management institutes X, Y and Z. They had opted for one out of the three specializations - Marketing, Finance and Personnel - with at least two of them in each specialization. No two persons have the same combination of institute and specialization. The Marketing specialist from institute Y earns the maximum. D studied in institute Z with Personnel specialization and earns more than only B and K. H studied in institute X with Marketing and earns less than only P and T. R studied in institute Z with Finance and earns more than D but less than H. T studied in institute X with Finance specialization. K, A personnel specialist, studied in institute Y and is not the least earner among them. B is the only Finance specialist from one of these institutes among them.Q.In which of the institutes did B study?

View answer

Top Courses for Banking ExamsView all

Lucent for GK

Current Affairs & Hindu Analysis: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

General Awareness & Knowledge

Tips & Tricks for Government Exams

Improve Your Calculations: Vedic Maths (English)

Top Courses for Banking Exams

View all

__________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.a)Ministry of Home Affairsb)Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilisersc)Ministry of Health & Family Welfared)Ministry of Social Justice & Empowermente)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
__________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.a)Ministry of Home Affairsb)Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilisersc)Ministry of Health & Family Welfared)Ministry of Social Justice & Empowermente)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for Banking Exams 2025 is part of Banking Exams preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Banking Exams exam syllabus. Information about __________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.a)Ministry of Home Affairsb)Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilisersc)Ministry of Health & Family Welfared)Ministry of Social Justice & Empowermente)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Banking Exams 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for __________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.a)Ministry of Home Affairsb)Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilisersc)Ministry of Health & Family Welfared)Ministry of Social Justice & Empowermente)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for __________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.a)Ministry of Home Affairsb)Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilisersc)Ministry of Health & Family Welfared)Ministry of Social Justice & Empowermente)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Banking Exams. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Banking Exams Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of __________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.a)Ministry of Home Affairsb)Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilisersc)Ministry of Health & Family Welfared)Ministry of Social Justice & Empowermente)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of __________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.a)Ministry of Home Affairsb)Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilisersc)Ministry of Health & Family Welfared)Ministry of Social Justice & Empowermente)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for __________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.a)Ministry of Home Affairsb)Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilisersc)Ministry of Health & Family Welfared)Ministry of Social Justice & Empowermente)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of __________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.a)Ministry of Home Affairsb)Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilisersc)Ministry of Health & Family Welfared)Ministry of Social Justice & Empowermente)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice __________ has initiated ambitious Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) currently operational in 372 districts of the country with an aim to create awareness about ill effects of substance abuse among the youth, with special focus on higher education institutes, university campuses, schools and reaching out into the community and garnering community involvement and ownership of the Abhiyaan.a)Ministry of Home Affairsb)Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilisersc)Ministry of Health & Family Welfared)Ministry of Social Justice & Empowermente)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Banking Exams tests.

Explore Courses for Banking Exams exam