INTRODUCTION Broiler poultry farming plays an effective role in improving the economic status of the rural poultry farmers by increasing their socioeconomic condition besides providing nutritious food through meat. There is regional variation in poultry production like contract and non-contract patter of poultry farming in India Poultry is one of the fastest growing segments of the agricultural sector in India today. During the 2013–14 fiscal years, the nation exported 4.3 million metric tons of poultry products to the rest of the world for a total of Rs. 565.87 crores (APEDA, 2013). Broiler farming plays an effective role in improving the economic status of the rural people by increasing their income besides providing nutritious food through meat. There is regional variation in poultry production in India. The northern region is lagging behind as compared to southern and with in northern region. In northern region UP has poor performance as compared to Haryana and Punjab. The total Poultry in the country is 851.81 Million in 2019, increased by 16.8% over previous Census. The total Backyard Poultry in the country is 317.07 Million in 2019, increased by 45.8% over previous Census. The total Commercial Poultry in the country is 534.74 Million in 2019, increased by 4.5% over previous Census. According to estimates, in India, a vertically integrated system produced 90% of the poultry in the Southern region, 80% in the Western region, 70% in the Eastern region, and 10% in the Northern region (Rajan 2006). The socio-economic status like Age, education, family type, family size, experience, occupation of poultry farmer play important role in rate adoption and get more economy of poultry farmers in contract and non-contract pattern of broiler poultry farming. MATERIALS AND METHODS The Eastern Plain Zone was selected purposively due to highest poultry population among all other zones. The Eastern Plain Zone comprises of 12 districts namely Ambedkar nagar, Azamgarh, Ballia, Barabanki, Chandauli, Faizabad, Ghazipur, Jaunpur, Mau, Sant Ravidas Nagar, Sultanpur and Varanasi. For the present study, three districts viz. Sultanpur, Amethi and Pratpagarh were selected purposively out of 12 districts, on the basis of poultry population. Two District Ambedkarnagar and Sultanpur was selected from eastern plain zone of Uttar Pradesh, purposively on the basis of poultry population and intensity of contract broiler farmers. From each block, two lists, one of contract broiler farmers and other of non-contract broiler fanners were prepared. From each list 20 contract and 20 non-contract poultry farmers having at least 2000 birds and two years of experience in poultry farming were selected randomly. Thus from each block 40 farmers (20 contract and 20 non-contract) were selected which make the total sample size of 180 broiler farmers (80 contract and 80 non-contract). RESULTS AND DISCUSION 1. Age. The Table 1 reveals that pooled mean age of broiler farmers was 39.25 years. The average age of the contract and non-contract broiler farmers was 38.66 and 39.85 years, respectively. It is evident from the table that maximum percentage of respondents (60.63%) was middle, followed by old (20.62%) and young age category (18.75%). In case of contract broiler farming majority of the respondents (56.25%) were belonging to middle age category followed by young age (23.75) and old age (20.00) respectively. While, maximum Non contract based farmers belonged to middle aged group (65.00) followed by old (21.25) and young (13.75). Ram swami et al. (2006) also reported similar findings as average age of the farmers engaged in contract and non-contact broiler farming were 36 and 39 years, respectively. Babu (2013) also reported that majority of the farmers engaged in broiler farming belongs to young age group (Fig.1.). 2. Education. In the Table 2 analyzed that 37.50 per cent broiler farmers under contract broiler farming system were graduate, followed by Primary (17.50%), Middle (16.25%), high school (12.50%), post graduate (11.25 %), intermediate (3.75 %) and illiterate (1.25%). While under non-contract broiler farming system 38.75 per cent farmers were graduate followed by primary (17.50 %), middle (13.75%), high school (12.50%), post graduate (10.00%), intermediate (5.00%), Illiterate (2.50%). Overall, 38.12 per cent broiler farmers were having education up to graduate, followed by Primary (17.50%), middle (15.00%), high school (12.50%), intermediate and post graduate (8.75%), illiterate (1.87%).Similar findings reported by Bhimraj et al. (2017) (Fig. 2). 3. Caste. A cursory on Table 3 reveals that maximum percentage (46.25%) of contract broiler farmers belonged to OBC caste followed by general (32.50%). While under non-contract broiler farming system 52.50 per cent respondents were found to OBC caste category followed by general (32.50%) and SC (15.00%). On overall basis also 49.38 per cent of the broiler farmers were under OBC caste category, followed by general (32.50%) and SC (18.12%) (Fig. 3). 4. Religion. Table 4 reveals that more than fifty per cent of the broiler farmers belonged to Hindu (63.75%) religion followed by Muslim (36.25%). While in case of non-contract broiler farming systems 58.75 per cent of the broiler farmers belonged to Hindu religion and rest 41.25 per cent were Muslim. Overall, 61.25 per cent of the broiler farmers in the study area were Hindu, followed by Muslim (38.75%) (Fig. 4). 5. Land holding. Table 5 reveals that the average land holding size contract and non-contract broiler farmers were 2.44 and 2.24 respectively. The study also revealed that highest percentage (42.25%) of the contract broiler farmers had medium land holding followed by small (33.75%), large (13.75%), and marginal (10.00%). While, in case of non-contract broiler farming system majority of the broiler farmers (46.25%) had medium land holding, followed by small (32.50%), Marginal (15.00%) and large (6.25%). Overall average land holding of broiler farmers was 2.34. Similar findings reported by Bhimraj et al. (2017) (Fig. 5). 6. Type of Family. The Table 6 Shows that majority (51.25%) of the contract broiler farmers belonged to nuclear family type, followed by joint family (48.75%). While 53.75 per cent non-contract broiler farmers belonged to joint family and the rest 46.25 per cent belonged to nuclear family system. Overall, majority (51.25%) of the broiler farmers having joint family, followed by nuclear family (48.75%). Khan (2006); Mandal et al. (2006); Babu (2013) also reported the similar findings. 7. Size of Family. Table 7 reveals that more than fifty per cent of the broiler farmers (52.50%) under contract broiler farming system had medium family size (7-9 members) followed by small (35.00%) and large (12.50%). While in case of non-contract broiler farming system of the broiler farmers (50.00%) had medium family size, followed by small (27.50%) and large (22.50%). Overall, about fifty per cent of the broiler farmers (51.25%) had medium family size, followed by small (31.25%) and large (17.50%). Mohanraj and Manivannan (2012) also reported similar findings (Fig. 6). 8. Occupation. Table 8 indicates that about fifty per cent contract broiler farmers (52.50%) had engaged agriculture and broiler farming followed by Agriculture (28.75%), Agriculture + Business (10.00%) and agriculture and services (8.75%). While maximum percentage of non- contract broiler farmers (46.25%) engaged in agriculture followed by agriculture and broiler farming (35.00%), agriculture and business (11.25%) and agriculture and service (7.50%). Ramaswami (2006); Gopala et al. (2017) also reported the similar findings (Fig. 7).