PGS-India isn't run by a single office — it's a chain of committees and councils, each with a distinct role, set out in Chapter 2 of the official guidelines. Knowing where your Local Group or Regional Council actually sits in this structure explains why some decisions get made locally and others have to travel all the way up.
The Chain of Command
controlling authority"] --> B["PGS-NAC
policy + standards"] B --> C["PGS-NEC
authorises councils"] C --> D["PGS Secretariat
at NCOF"] D --> E["Zonal Councils
monitor RCs"] E --> F["Regional Councils
oversee Local Groups"] F --> G["Local Groups
peer appraisal"]
Who Does What
| Body | Its actual job |
|---|---|
| DA&FW | Overall controlling authority for the entire programme, under the Secretary, DA&FW |
| PGS-NAC | Apex policy body headed by the Additional Secretary — defines operational guidelines and the PGS-India Standards, approves programme changes |
| PGS-NEC | Implementation and decision-making body — selects and authorises Zonal and Regional Councils, and can withdraw that authorisation |
| PGS Secretariat | Day-to-day execution, coordinates evaluation and surveillance visits, final approver of full conversion-period waivers |
| Zonal Councils | Monitor and physically evaluate Regional Councils at least once every 12 months; hear escalated appeals against RC decisions |
| Regional Councils | Authorise and oversee Local Groups, individual producers, and processors in their region |
| Local Groups | Where peer appraisal and day-to-day certification actually happens |
A Naming Correction Worth Making Explicitly
The PGS-India Secretariat sits under the National Centre for Organic and Natural Farming. The 2023 guidelines abbreviate this as NCONF in their own abbreviations table, reflecting a rename — the body was previously the National Centre of Organic Farming, without "Natural."
Both abbreviations remain in active circulation. The portal domain itself is still pgsindia-ncof.gov.in, and parts of the official document use each form. NCOF and NCONF refer to the same body — if you see either, they point to the same organisation.
Why the Structure Matters Practically
This layering is why escalation has a fixed route. A complaint against a Local Group goes to the Regional Council. An appeal against an RC's decision goes to the Zonal Council. Only a genuinely stuck escalation reaches the PGS Secretariat itself:
| Your complaint is about… | It goes to… |
|---|---|
| A Local Group, individual producer, or processor | The concerned Regional Council |
| A Regional Council's functioning | The Zonal Council and PGS Secretariat |
| Certification denial by your RC | The Zonal Council |
| Misuse of the PGS-India logo | The Zonal Council or Regional Council |
| An appeal the Zonal Council hasn't addressed in time | The PGS Secretariat |
Trying to skip a layer — emailing the Secretariat directly about a Local Group dispute, for instance — is the single most common reason complaints stall. The body you wrote to has no jurisdiction to act at that level yet.
We cover the escalation timelines — including how long each body has to respond — in detail later in this series. For the principles this whole structure exists to enforce, start with the guiding principles.