The present invention relates to dry flowable herbicidal formulation of Oxyfluorfen. The present invention also includes process of preparation of the dry flowable herbicidal formulation and uses thereof.
> BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The crop protection from weeds and other unwanted vegetation which inhibit crop growth is a constantly recurring problem in agriculture. Therefore, the control of weeds or unwanted plants is economically important for the crop productivity. Researchers in the field of synthetic chemistry have produced an extensive variety of chemicals and chemical formulations as solo ) or in combination of active ingredients for the control of such weeds or unwanted plants. Formulation of chemical herbicides of many types have been disclosed in the literature and a large number of them are in commercial use.
Oxyfluorfen is commonly formulated as an emulsifiable concentrate (EC). However, an EC formulation contains very large amounts of organic and petroleum distillate solvents, and
> therefore carries risk of fiammability during production, storage, packing, transportation and
application. The use of these highly flammable solvents is harmful to humans and non-target
organisms as these organic solvents are rapidly absorbed into the skin of humans and non-
target organisms. After application in agricultural fields, these volatile solvents evaporate and
contaminate the environment. They may also lead to the problem of scorching in target crops,
) thereby, causing problem of phyto-toxicity. Hence, research is being focused towards better pesticide formulations which minimize the use of organic solvents in agricultural in order to address the problem of phyto-toxicity due to it. Environment protection authorities globally are also encouraging newer pesticide formulations with no or minimum use of organic and petroleum distillate solvents.
> Thus, there exists a need to provide an improved herbicidal formulation of Oxyfluorfen which
is not only highly effective in targeting weeds and safe to humans and other warm-blooded
animals but also solves the problems such as fiammability, sedimentation, inhalation risk, skin
toxicity and phyto-toxicity associated with existing commercial formulations.

The present invention provides a dry flowable herbicidal formulation comprising Oxyfluorfen and at least one excipient selected from the group comprising of dispersing agent, dispersing cum wetting agent, disintegrating agent, and filler.
In an embodiment, the formulation of the present invention comprises Oxyfluorfen in an i amount in the range from 15 to 25% w/w.
In another embodiment, the formulation of the present invention comprises the dispersing agent in an amount in the range from 1 to 20% w/w.
In an embodiment, the formulation of the present invention comprises the dispersing cum wetting agent in an amount in the range from 1 to 15% w/w.
) In an embodiment, the formulation of the present invention comprises the disintegrating agent in an amount in the range from 0.1 to 5% w/w.
In an embodiment, the formulation of the present invention comprises the fillers in an amount in the range from 10 to 80% w/w.
In an embodiment, the formulation of the present invention is formulated in dry flowable form.
> In another embodiment the present invention further discloses a process for preparing the dry
flowable herbicidal formulation comprising the steps of:
(a) mixing all the excipients in a pre-blender to form a homogenous mixture;
(b) adding oxyfluorfen and grinding in air classifier mill/air jet mill;
(c) adding requisite quantity of water to make a dough and passing through extruder mill ) maintained to produce granules;
(d) drying the granules obtained in step (c) in a dryer to obtain dried granules; and
(e) sieving the dried granules obtained in step (d) to obtain dried granules as per laid down
specification given in Table 3.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
> The definitions provided herein for the terminologies used in the present disclosure are for
illustrative purpose only and in no manner limit the scope of the present invention disclosed in
the present disclosure.

Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by person of ordinary skill in the art to which the invention pertains. Although other methods and materials similar, or equivalent, to those described herein can be used in the practice of the present invention, the preferred materials and methods are described i herein.
It is to be noted that, as used in the specification and the appended claims, the singular forms "a", "an" and "the" include plural referents unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Thus, for example, reference to a formulation or composition containing "a compound" includes a mixture of two or more compounds. It should also be noted that the term "or" is generally ) employed in its sense including "and/or" unless the content clearly dictates otherwise.
As used herein, the terms "comprises", "comprising", "includes", "including", or any other variation thereof, are intended to cover a non-exclusive inclusion, subject to any limitation explicitly indicated. For example, a formulation, a composition or a method that comprises a list of elements is not necessarily limited to only those elements but may include other elements
> not expressly listed or inherent to such formulation, composition, or method.
As used herein, the terms "formulation" or "composition" can be used interchangeably, unless stated otherwise, is meant to encompass, and are not limited to, formulations or compositions containing the combination of oxyfluorfen and excipients.
As used herein, the term "excipient(s)" refers to inert substances and are auxiliary substances ) added to the processing or use of pesticide preparations and used to improve the physical and chemical properties of formulations. The auxiliaries themselves are essentially free of biological activity, but can affect the control effect.
The expression of various quantities in terms of "% w/w" or "%" means the percentage by weight, relative to the weight of the total solution or composition unless otherwise specified.
> The term "active ingredient" (a.i.) or "active agent" used herein refers to that component of the
composition responsible for control of weeds or undesired plants.
As used herein, the term "effective amount" means the amount of the active substances in the formulation or compositions to achieve an observable effect on growth, including the effects of necrosis, death, retardation, prevention, and removal, destruction, or otherwise diminishing

the occurrence and activity of the target weeds. An effective amount of the compositions will also vary according to the prevailing conditions such as desired herbicidal effect and duration, weather, target species, locus, mode of application, and the like.
As used herein, the term "herbicide", refers to any chemical substance used to destroy/kill, i delay, reduce, inhibit or otherwise adversely affect the growth of plants, especially weeds.
As used herein, the term "Oxyfluorfen" encompasses its agrochemically acceptable salts, derivatives or any other modified form of Oxyfluorfen. Oxyfluorfen having IUPAC name 2-chloro-a,a,a-trifluoro-p-tolyl 3-ethoxy-4-nitrophenyl ether belongs to the group of diphenyl ether herbicide. It acts by inhibition of protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO). It is absorbed more ) readily by foliage (and especially the shoots) than by roots with very little translocation. It is used for pre-emergence and post-emergence control of annual broad leaved and grass weeds in tree fruit, citrus, vines, nuts, cereals, maize, soybeans, peanuts, rice, cotton, bananas, peppermint, onions, garlic, ornamentals and conifer seedbeds.
The present invention provides a dry flowable herbicidal composition comprising Oxyfluorfen
> and at least one excipient selected from the group comprising of dispersing agent, dispersing
cum wetting agent, disintegrating agent, and filler.
In an embodiment, the formulation of the present invention comprises Oxyfluorfen in an amount in the range from 15 to 25% w/w, preferably Oxyfluorfen is present in an amount of
20% w/w.
) In an embodiment, the formulation of the present invention comprises one or more excipients selected from the group comprising of dispersing agent, dispersing cum wetting agent, disintegrating agent, and filler or a combination thereof and it may also contain if desired, one or more auxiliaries customary for crop protection compositions.
It is generally observed that solid particles in a liquid undergo spontaneous aggregation to form
> lumps. Hence, it is recommended to add a dispersing agent which prevents agglomeration of
solid particles and keep them suspended in fluid. Similarly, wetting is the first stage of
dispersion, in which air surrounding the granular composition is substituted with water.
Wetting of the composition with water cannot occur if the surface tension of the liquid is very

high. Hence, it is recommended to add a dispersing cum wetting agent to the formulation to facilitate the process of dispersion of the granules in the liquid.
Accordingly, the formulation of the present invention contains dispersing agent and dispersing cum wetting agent, which may be selected from group of surfactants comprising of, but not
i limited to, sugar esters such as sorbitan monolaurate, polyoxyethylene sorbitan monolaurate; alkyl polyglucoside such as decyl glucoside; polyoxyethylene alkyl ethers such as polyoxyethylene lauryl ether or polyoxyethylene coconut fatty alcohol ether; polyoxyethylene alkynyl ether such as 2,4,7,9-tetramethyl-5-decyn-4,7-diol ether; polyoxyethylene aryl ethers such as polyoxyethylene nonylphenyl ether or polyoxyethylene tristyrylphenyl ether;
) polyoxyethylene vegetable oil ethers such as polyoxyethylene castor oil or polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil; polyoxyethylene fatty acid esters such as polyoxyethylene monolaurate, polyoxyethylene distearate or polyoxyethylene resin acid ester; polyalkylene oxide block copolymer such as polyoxyethylene polyoxypropylene block copolymers (such as Pluronic®); polyoxyethylene polyoxypropylene alkyl ether such as polyoxyethylene
> polyoxypropylene lauryl ether; polyoxyethylene polyoxypropylene aryl ether such as
polyoxyethylene polyoxypropylene styrylphenyl ether; polyoxyethylene alkyl amines such as
polyoxyethylene stearyl amine; polyoxyethylene fatty acid amide such as lauric acid
diethanolamid; fluorinated surfactant; alkyl sulfates such as sodium lauryl sulfate, sodium
alkylbenzene sulphonate; polyoxyethylene alkyl ether sulfates such as sodium polyoxyethylene
) lauryl ether sulfate; polyoxyethylene aryl ether sulfates such as sodium polyoxyethylene nonylphenyl ether sulfate or ammonium polyoxyethylene tristyrylphenyl ether sulfate; tristyryl phenol ethoxylated, amine salt of phosphate tristyryl phenol ethoxylated; aryl sulfonate such as calcium dodecyl benzene sulfonate, naphthalene sulphonate derivative like salt of naphthalene sulfonate such as sodium naphthalene sulfonate; sodium salt of alkyl naphthalene
> sulphonate, naphthalene sulfonate of formaldehyde condensate or sodium naphthalene
sulfonate formaldehyde condensate, naphthalene alkyl aryl sulphonate; 'alpha'-olefin
sulfonate; alkyl sulfosuccinate such as sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate; lignin based sulphonate
such as sodium lignosulphonate; sodium salt of sulfomethylated lignosulfonic acid,
polycarboxylic acid sodium salt; N-methyl fatty acid sarcosinate; sodium polycarboxylate;
) alkoxylated phosphate ester such as high molecular weight polymer PEG-10 PPG-5-cetyl phosphate; ethoxylated polyarylphenol phosphate ester, polyoxyethylene alkyl ether phosphate; polyoxyethylene aryl ether phosphates such as polyoxyethylene phenyl ether phosphate or polyoxyethylene nonylphenyl ether phosphate; polyoxyethylene

polyoxypropylene block copolymer phosphate; graft copolymer such as polymethyl methacrylate-polyethylene glycol graft copolymer; acrylic copolymer; alcohol block copolymer; ethylene oxide (EO)-polyethylene oxide (PO) block copolymer, non-ionic ethoxylated, polyoxyethylene ether of triglyceride ester, Poly(oxy-l,2-ethanediyl) alpha-i (tris(l-phenylethyl)phenyl)-omega-hydroxy. These dispersing agents and dispersing cum wetting agents may be used alone or in combination thereof.
Preferably the dispersing agent is selected from the group comprising of sodium lignosulphonate, sodium salt of sulfomethylated lignosulfonic acid or a combination thereof, and present in an amount in the range from 1 to 20% w/w.
) Preferably the dispersing cum wetting agent is selected from the group comprising of sodium salt of alkyl naphthalene sulphonate, sodium polycarboxylate or a combination thereof, and present in an amount in the range from 1 to 15% w/w.
As used herein, the term disintegrating agent refers to an excipient that can swell or disintegrate the composition. Disintegrating agent is selected from the group comprising of, but not limited
> to, citric acid, sodium bicarbonate, sodium tripolyphosphate, stearic acid metal salt, cellulose
powder, dextrin, methacrylate copolymer, cross-linked polyvinylpyrrolidone,
polyaminocarboxylic acid chelate compound, styrene sulfonate/isobutylene/maleic anhydride
copolymer, starch/polyacrylonitrile graft copolymer, sodium hexametaphosphate,
microcrystalline cellulose, carboxymethyl cellulose, sodium starch glycolate, sodium
) polycarbonate, bentonite. These disintegrating agents may be used alone or in combination thereof. Preferably, the disintegrating agent is citric acid and is present in an amount in the range from 0.1 to 5% w/w.
As used herein, the term filler refers to solid chemicals that are added to a pesticide formulation to aid in the delivery of the active ingredient. Filler is selected from the group comprising of,
> but not limited to, natural minerals such as quartz, talc, kaolin, pyrophyllite, montmorillonite,
attapulgite, bentonite clay, china clay, kieselguhr, chalk, zeolite, calcite, sericite, acid clay,
diatomaceous earth, natural rock, Fuller's earth, meerschaum, gibbsite, dolomite or pumice;
synthetic minerals such as precipitated silica, fumed silica, sodium silicate, alumina,
aluminium hydroxide; inorganic salts such as calcium carbonate, ammonium sulphate or other
) ammonium salts, sodium sulphate, potassium chloride. The filler may be used alone or in combination thereof. Preferably, the filler is selected from the group comprising ammonium

sulphate, china clay or a combination thereof, and present in an amount in the range from 10
to 80% w/w.
In another embodiment the present invention further discloses a process for preparing the dry
flowable herbicidal formulation comprising the steps of:
i (a) mixing all the excipients in a pre-blender to form a homogenous mixture;
(b) adding oxyfluorfen and grinding in air classifier mill/air jet mill;
(c) adding requisite quantity of water to make a dough and passing through extruder mill maintained to produce granules;
(d) drying the granules obtained in step (c) in a dryer to obtain dried granules; and
) (e) sieving the dried granules obtained in step (d) to obtain dried granules as per laid down
specification as given in Table 3.
The formulation of the present invention can be applied by any one of the methods selected from atomization, spreading, dusting, spraying, diffusion, immersion, irrigation, injection, mixing, sprinkling (water immersion), foaming, dressing, coating, blasting, fumigation,
> smoking, smog and painting.
The rate of application amount varies depending on, for example, the blending ratio of active ingredient and excipients, meteorological condition, dosage form, application time, application method, application place, weed to be controlled, and target crop, in ordinary cases.
) The formulation of the present invention provides a number of other advantages:
• It is free of any organic solvent and hence it is relatively safe to human beings, non-target organisms and target crops.
• Reduced occupational exposure hazards to the farmers because of reduction in the number of sprays and removal of organic solvents from the formulation.Increased
> efficacy in comparison to the other formulations tested during the field trials.
• Economically beneficial to the farmers as it provides better yield of the crop with single spray.
• Is storage stable and non-flammable.
• Is non-phytotoxic.
) • Reduction in generation of empty pesticide containers, thereby, reducing environmental
concerns for their disposal.

The embodiments of the present invention are more particularly described in the following examples that are intended as illustrations only, since numerous modifications and variations within the scope of the present invention will be apparent to those of skill in the art. Unless otherwise noted, all parts, percentages and ratio reported in the following examples are on a i weight basis and all excipients used in the examples were obtained or are available from the chemical suppliers.
EXAMPLES
Examples 1 to 3
The dry flowable (DF) herbicidal formulation of the present invention comprising oxyfluorfen ) and excipients is provided in example 1 to 3. The unit of each component of the composition are expressed in "% w/w" i.e. the percentage by weight, relative to the weight of the total solution or formulation or composition unless otherwise specified. The composition contemplated by Example 1-3 that is tabulated in Table 1 is formulated as a dry flowable (DF) herbicidal composition.
Table 1: Dry flowable herbicidal formulation of Oxyfluorfen

S.No. Name of Component Function Eg:l Eg: 2 Eg: 3
Quantity
(% w/w) Quantity
(% w/w) Quantity
(% w/w)
1 Oxyfluorfen Active Ingredient 20.00 15.00 25.00
2 Sodium salt of sulfomethylated lignosulfonic acid Dispersing agent 2.00 1.50 2.50
3 Sodium lignosulphonate Dispersing agent 9.00 7.00 11.00
4 Sodium salt of alkyl naphthalene sulphonate Dispersing cum wetting agent 3.00 2.00 4.00
5 Sodium polycarboxylate Dispersing cum wetting agent 2.00 1.50 2.50
6 Citric acid Disintegrating agent 0.30 0.20 0.40
7 Ammonium sulphate Filler 10.00 7.50 12.50
8 China clay Filler 53.70 65.30 42.10
Total 100.00 100.00 100.00

Process of preparing dry flowable herbicidal formulation of Oxyfluorfen
Table 2 provides quantities of active ingredient and raw material charged to prepare the dry flowable herbicidal formulation of Oxyfluorfen. In table 2, active ingredient Oxyfluorfen is in technical grade with 97% purity. Particularly example 1 corresponds to column A in table 2.
Table 2: Quantities of active ingredient and raw material charged

S.N. Ingredients B

Quantity (g)
1 Oxyfluorfen Technical (97% Basis) 20.62
2 Sodium salt of sulfomethylated lignosulfonic acid 2.00
3 Sodium lignosulphonate 9.00
4 Sodium salt of alkyl naphthalene sulphonate 3.00
5 Sodium polycarboxylate 2.00
6 Citric acid 0.30
7 Ammonium sulphate 10.00
8 China clay 53.08
Total 100.00
The required quantities of excipients as illustrated in table 2 were weighed and transferred to pre-blender and blended for one hour to form a homogenous mixture. This premix is milled with suitable Air Jet Mill/Air Classifier Mill till particle size below 10 micron (D90) is
) achieved. After that, requisite quantity of water, approximately 10-20% water, was added to make dough and the dough was quickly passed through an extruder mill maintained at RPM 20-25 and at a temperature of not more than 50°C to produce granules. This was followed by slow drying the granules in a Fluid Bed Dryer while keeping air flow between 75-80% with temperature of the air at not more than 50°C and drying till the moisture content in the granules
> is reduced to 3%. The quality of in-process sample was checked for conformance to the laid down specifications. The approved sample was transferred for packing as per the requirement.
Storage Stability Study: The dry flowable (DF) herbicidal formulation of Oxyfluorfen prepared as per above process was evaluated for storage stability (Shelf Life Study) under ambient conditions for a period of 30 months. The storage stability study was performed by ) ANA LABORATORIES, Mumbai, approved by National Accreditation Board for Testing & Calibration Laboratories (NABL), at three different agroclimatic locations, viz., Mumbai, Delhi and Chennai from April 1, 2014 to October 1, 2016. The study was conducted to assess the quality of dry flowable (DF) herbicidal formulation of Oxyfluorfen for conformance to

specification presented below in table 3 during storage under ambient conditions for a period of 30 months under different agroclimatic conditions.
Table 3: Specification of Oxyfluorfen 20% DF

S.No. Characteristics Requirements
1 Description Brown coloured granules free from extraneous impurities
2 Oxyfluorfen Content, % w/w 20.00+1.00
3 Suspensibility, % w/w 75.00 min.
4 Wettability 120 sec max.
5 Wet sieve test (Material passing through 75 micron sieve), % w/w 99.00 min.
6 Acidity (as H2S04), % w/w 0.50 max.
Table 4: Storage Stability test data of dry flowable (DF) herbicidal formulation of Oxyfluorfen as disclosed in Egl at Mumbai location.

Period
of
testing Description Oxyfluorfe n Content,
% w/w Suspensibility,
% w/w Wettability, seconds Wet sieve test,%
w/w Acidity (as H2SO4), %
w/w
0M Brown
coloured
granules free
from
extraneous
impurities 20.86 89.75 25 100 0.0495
3M -do- 20.63 89.20 25 100 0.0732
6M -do- 20.38 88.65 26 100 0.0988
9M -do- 20.17 88.03 27 100 0.1255
12 M -do- 20.00 87.62 27 100 0.1582
18 M -do- 19.86 87.17 28 100 0.1740
24 M -do- 19.68 86.51 28 100 0.1902
30 M -do- 19.41 86.15 29 100 0.2133

The results as presented in table 4, 5 and 6 shows that dry flowable (DF) herbicidal formulation of Oxyfluorfen is found to be stable for a period of up to 30 month and meet the specification as described in table 1, hence the dry flowable (DF) herbicidal formulation of Oxyfluorfen of present invention is storage stable under ambient conditions.
i Bio-efficacy of Dry Flowable (DF) herbicidal formulation of Oxyfluorfen
Experimental trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of herbicidal formulation of the present invention against major weeds in Direct Seeded Paddy crop as per the details provided in Table 7-31. The field experiment was conducted during kharif season 2017-18 and 2018-19 at the Agricultural Farm, Institute of Agriculture, Visva-Bharati, Sriniketan, Birbhum, West ) Bengal. The dry flowable (DF) herbicidal formulation of present invention comprising Oxyfluorfen 20% DF and commercially available Oxyfluorfen 23.5% EC (Oxyguard), Pretilachlor 30.7% EC (Wilfit) and Pendimethalin 30% EC were evaluated against grasses and broad leaved weeds like Echinochloa spp., Cyperus difformis, Cyperus iria, Fimbristylis miliacia, Eclipta alba, Ludwigia parviflora and Marsilea spp.
> The experiment was laid out in Randomized Block Design (RBD) with eleven treatments each replicated thrice. The plot size was 6 m x 6 m and the spacing was 20 cm x 20 cm. All the recommended agronomic practices were followed throughout the cropping period. The different formulations were weighed according to the doses and diluted in water and applied using high volume knapsack sprayer fitted with flat fan nozzle and evaluated for various
) Biometric observations such as weed count/population, weed dry weight, weed control efficiency, and phytotoxicity observation and growth; and yield parameters such as Plant height, Number of panicles m"2, Length of panicle, Number of grains panicle"1, Test weight and Grain yield.
Table 7: Treatment Details

S.No. Treatments No. Treatment Details
1. Ti Oxyflourfen 20% DF @ 800 g/ha
2. T2 Oxyflourfen 20% DF @ 1000 g/ha
3. T3 Oxyflourfen 20% DF @ 1200 g/ha
4. T4 Oxyflourfen 20% DF @ 2400 g/ha
5. T5 Oxyflourfen 20% DF @ 3600 g/ha
6. T6 Check I- Oxygourd(Oxyflourfen 23.5% EC) @ 1000 ml/ha

5000 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.37 1.33 1.35 1.54 1.52 1.53 1.52 1.50 1.5
T8 ml/h a (0.88 ) (0.88 ) (0.8 8) (1.37) (1.28 ) (1.3
2) (1.89
) (1.87 ) (1.8 8) (1.86) (1.79 ) 1 (1.8
3)
0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 1.18 1.10 1.14 1.24 1.19 1.2
T9 - (0.00 ) (0.00 ) (0.0 0) (0.00) (0.00 ) (0.0 0) (0.89 ) (0.73 ) (0.8 1) (1.03) (0.91 ) 1
(0.9 7)
0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.7
Tio - (0.00 ) (0.00 ) (0.0 0) (0.00) (0.00 ) (0.0 0) (0.00 ) (0.00 ) (0.0 0) (0.00) (0.00 ) 1
(0.0 0)
2.00 2.04 2.02 2.36 2.30 2.33 2.68 2.70 2.69 2.58 2.55 2.5
Tn (3.51 ) (3.67 ) (3.5 9) (5.06) (4.80 ) (4.9 3) (6.71 ) (6.79 ) (6.7 5) (6.17) (5.98 ) 6
(6.0
8)
SEm 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.0
(±) 6
CD 0.07 0.10 0.06 0.13 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.19 0.16 0.18 0.16 0.1
at 7
5%
CV 3.94 5.34 3.08 4.27 3.35 3.49 4.32 8.01 5.11 7.53 6.54 6.0
(%) 8
Figures in parentheses are the original values. The data was transformed to SQRT (x+ 0.5) before analysis
Among the herbicidal treatments lowest dry weight oiMarsilea spp. population was observed in plot treated with T5, T4, T3, T2 over Ti, T6, T7 and Ts. All Oxyflourfen 20% DF formulation i treatments except Ti recorded significantly lower number oiMarsilea spp. population than all the standard checks used in the experiment..
Weed Control EfUciency; using the species-wise weed dry weight recorded at 15, 30, 45 and 60 days after herbicide application under absolute control and the respective treatments, the weed control efficiency (WCE) for each treatment was calculated by using below formula. ) Weed control efficiency (%) =
weed dry weiqht in untreated plot — weed dry weiqht in treated plot
WeeddryJgktinuntreatedplot ~ *100
The final weed data (weed count and weed dry weight) was transformed using the formula (X+0.5) °-5 for analysis purpose.
Table 22: Effect of treatment on weed control efficiency against Echinochloa spp.st different DAHA
Dose 15 DAHA 30 DAHA 45 DAHA 60 DAHA

Tre atm ents 201
7-18 201 8-19 Me an 201
7-18 201 8-19 Me an 201
7-18 201 8-19 Me an 201
7-18 201 8-19 Me an
Ti 800 g/ha 73.7 7 71.7 1 72.7 4 72.2 7 69.8 8 71.0 8 69.3
4 68.9 9 69.1
7 67.1
2 67.8 9 67.5 1
T2 1000 g/ha 78.1 8 79.2 7 78.7 3 78.9 0 77.1 0 78.0 0 77.1 6 75.7
2 76.4 4 79.9
7 76.9
2 78.4
5
T3 1200 g/ha 78.3 3 80.5
3 79.4
3 79.1 0 79.8
7 79.4 9 80.2
5 76.6
2 78.4 4 80.8
7 76.7
5 78.8 1
T4 2400 g/ha 80.5 6 80.9
2 80.7 4 81.5 0 82.8 9 82.2 0 82.1
3 80.4 8 81.3 1 82.1
5 79.5 9 80.8
7
T5 3600 g/ha 84.2 8 83.3 1 83.8 0 84.6
7 84.0
5 84.3 6 86.2 4 83.5 3 84.8 9 86.4 9 84.6 0 85.5
5
T6 1000 ml/ha 77.5 4 77.7 8 77.6 6 76.8 0 75.0 3 75.9
2 78.4 1 72.4 9 75.4
5 70.0 9 65.5
3 67.8 1
T7 2000 ml/ha 75.4 1 74.5 7 74.9 9 75.6 4 73.4 3 74.5 4 70.8 7 70.7 9 70.8
3 71.2
2 61.6
2 66.4
2
T8 5000 ml/ha 72.8 6 74.4 9 73.6 8 70.5 4 72.2 3 71.3 9 68.6 0 66.0 0 67.3 0 69.2
7 51.6
5 60.4 6
T9 - 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 86.3
2 85.3 6 85.8
4 83.9 1 81.6
7 82.7 9
Tio - 100. 00 100. 0 100. 00 100. 0 100. 0 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100. 0 100. 00
Tn - —-
Among the herbicidal treatments Ts, T4, T3, T2 recorded higher weed control efficiency over Ti, T6, T7 and T8 at 15, 30, 45 and 60 DAAH. All Oxyflourfen 20% DF formulation treatments except Ti recorded significantly lower number of Echinochloa spp. population than all the standard checks used in the experiment.
Table 23: Effect of treatment on weed control efficiency against Cyperus iria at different DAHA

Tre atm ents Dose 15 DAHA 30 DAHA 45 DAHA 60 DAHA

2017 -18 2018 -19 Me an 201 7-18 2018 -19 Me an 2017 -18 2018 -19 Me an 2017 -18 2018 -19 Me an
Ti 800 g/ha 78.09 78.3 8 78. 24 77.2 1 76.3 4 76.
77 74.8 6 75.5 0 75. 13 72.3 7 73.28 72. 82
T2 1000 g/ha 81.15 80.8
2 80. 98 81.0
4 79.0 9 80. 06 79.0 7 79.6
3 78. 20 77.8 6 78.16 78. 01
T3 1200 g/ha 81.00 80.6 1 80. 80 80.1
5 79.5 4 79. 84 79.2 8 79.4
4 78. 43 76.7
5 77.64 77. 20
T4 2400 g/ha 81.40 81.3
5 81. 38 81.2 8 81.8 1 81. 54 80.9 9 81.1 0 80. 18 79.5 1 80.71 80. 11

T5 3600 g/ha 83.65 83.2
5 83. 45 83.3 3 82.6 8 83. 01 83.1 1 82.1
5 81.
23 81.9
3 80.11 81.
02
T6 1000 ml/ha 81.73 78.3 9 80. 06 77.8 6 77.0 8 77. 47 71.5 7 76.1 4 75. 67 74.1
5 74.32 74. 24
T7 2000 ml/ha 78.56 79.4 1 78. 98 76.8
7 77.1 6 77. 01 14.4 1 74.0 4 75. 01 71.7 6 73.33 72. 54
T8 5000 ml/ha 78.07 76.9
3 77. 50 73.2 6 73.8
2 73. 54 72.9 0 70.1 9 69. 21 69.2
7 68.88 69.
07
T9 - 100.0 0 100. 00 100 .00 100. 00 100. 00 100 .00 81.7
2 81.0
3 80. 50 75.4
2 79.05 77. 24
Tio - 100.0 0 100. 0 100 .00 100. 0 100. 0 100 .00 100. 00 100. 00 100 .00 100. 00 100.0 100 .00
Tn — — — — — — — — — — — —
Among the herbicidal treatments Ts, T4, T3, T2 recorded higher weed control efficiency over Ti, T6, T7 and T8 at 15, 30, 45 and 60 DAAH. All Oxyflourfen 20% DF formulation treatments except Ti recorded significantly lower number of Cyperus iria population than all the standard checks used in the experiment.
Table 24: Effect of treatment on weed control efficiency against Cyperus difformis at different DAHA

Tre atm ents Dose 15 DAHA 30 DAHA 45 DAHA 60 DAHA

2017 -18 2018 -19 Me an 2017 -18 2018 -19 Me an 2017 -18 2018-19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me n
Ti 800 g/ha 76.21 75.35 75.7 8 75.4 7 74.6 0 75.0 4 73.35 73.46 73.4 1 70.32 72.3 4 71.3 3
T2 1000 g/ha 79.10 81.13 80.1
2 78.4 6 80.0
2 79.2 4 76.43 78.25 77.3 4 75.79 77.7 4 76.7 7
T3 1200 g/ha 78.69 80.56 79.6
3 79.4 9 80.7
2 80.1 0 77.60 79.03 78.3 1 76.25 78.3 6 77.3 1
T4 2400 g/ha 79.48 80.91 80.2 0 80.5 1 80.1 9 80.3
5 78.58 79.09 78.8 4 78.54 79.8
2 79.1 8
T5 3600 g/ha 84.12 83.36 83.7 4 84.2 0 81.9 1 83.0
5 81.81 80.64 81.2
2 80.23 80.9 8 80.6 1
T6 1000 ml/ha 83.14 80.19 81.6 6 80.3 8 79.0 0 79.6 9 76.95 76.93 76.9
4 74.25 75.7 4 74.S 9
T7 2000 ml/ha 75.83 78.56 77.2 0 75.6 0 77.8 4 76.7
2 73.36 74.93 74.1 4 69.60 74.2 4 71.S
2
T8 5000 ml/ha 75.03 75.03 75.0 3 73.0
2 71.4
2 72.2
2 69.80 68.07 68.9
4 64.25 67.5
2 65.8 8
T9 - 100.0 0 100.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 82.21 80.14 81.1 8 79.08 78.9 6 79.C
2
Tio - 100.0 0 100.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100.0 0 100.00 100. 00 100.00 100. 00 100 00
Tn — — — — — — — — — — — —

Among the herbicidal treatments T5, T4, T3, T2 and T6 recorded higher weed control efficiency over Ti, T7 and Ts at 15 and 30 DAHA whereas at 45 and 60 DAAH, T5, T4, T3, and T2 recorded higher weed control efficiency over Ti, T6, T7 and Ts.
Table 25: Effect of treatment on weed control efficiency against Fimbristylis miliacia at different DAHA

Tre atm ents Dose 15 DAHA 30 DAHA 45 DAHA 60 DAHA

2017 -18 2018 -19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me an
Ti 800 g/ha 73.86 74.4 9 74.1 8 74.70 73.79 74.2
5 71.28 71.7 7 71.5 3 70.81 70.4 1 70. 61
T2 1000 g/ha 78.43 76.8
2 77.6 3 78.92 76.85 77.8 9 77.80 75.6 9 76.7
5 79.22 74.9 8 77. 10
T3 1200 g/ha 78.88 78.9 8 78.9
3 80.86 77.25 79.0 6 79.41 75.8 1 77.6 1 79.47 74.2 7 76. 87
T4 2400 g/ha 79.65 80.8
2 80.2
3 81.47 79.64 80.5
5 79.95 79.0
3 79.4 9 79.88 77.0 1 78. 45
T5 3600 g/ha 81.66 82.3 7 82.0 1 82.24 82.72 82.4 8 81.38 80.0 9 80.7
3 81.75 80.9
5 81.
35
T6 1000 ml/ha 77.70 76.7 8 77.2 4 75.23 75.92 75.5 8 73.46 75.4 0 74.4 3 72.37 73.3 3 72. 85
T7 2000 ml/ha 77.07 77.4 0 77.2 4 75.09 75.38 75.2 4 73.82 72.9
5 73.3 9 71.33 70.8 1 71. 07
Ts 5000 ml/ha 77.15 76.2 0 76.6 8 74.33 75.03 74.6 8 72.72 70.4
2 71.5 7 70.16 69.2 6 69. 71
T9 - 100.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 100.0 0 100.0 0 100. 00 80.22 81.8
7 81.0
4 77.30 77.1 3 77.
22
Tio - 100.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 100.0 0 100.0 0 100. 00 100.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 100.0 0 100. 00 100 .00
Tn — — — — — — — — — — — —
Among the herbicidal treatments T5, T4, T3, T2 recorded higher weed control efficiency over Ti, T6, T7 and T8 at 15, 30, 45 and 60 DAHA. All Oxyflourfen 20% DF formulation treatments except Ti recorded significantly lower number of Fimbristylis miliacia population than all the standard checks used in the experiment.
) Table 26: Effect of treatment on weed control efficiency against Eclipta alba at different DAHA

Tre atm ents Dose 15 DAHA 30 DAHA 45 DAHA 60 DAHA

2017 -18 2018 -19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me n
Ti 800 g/ha 76.48 76.9
2 76.7 0 75.05 75.17 75.1 1 73.56 71.8 0 72.6 8 72.27 70.25 71.2 6
T2 1000 g/ha 77.64 77.9 1 77.7 7 79.26 78.31 78.7 8 78.78 75.8 4 77.3 1 74.83 73.95 74.3 9

T3 1200 g/ha 78.44 78.1 8 78.3 1 78.91 78.93 78.9
2 79.61 78.6
7 79.1
4 75.62 79.26 77.4 4
T4 2400 g/ha 78.61 78.5 0 78.5
5 80.60 78.46 79.5 3 81.90 79.1 0 80.5 0 78.60 80.63 79i
2
T5 3600 g/ha 81.45 81.5
7 81.5 1 83.57 81.38 82.4 8 83.91 81.2 4 82.5 7 80.26 81.92 81.C 9
T6 1000 ml/ha 77.00 76.7 6 76.8 8 75.78 76.85 76.3 1 75.90 75.1 1 75.5 0 71.17 75.82 73.5 0
T7 2000 ml/ha 76.51 76.6
3 76.5 7 74.71 74.45 74.5 8 75.14 72.1 3 73.6 4 71.98 71.35 71i 6
T8 5000 ml/ha 75.70 74.3
5 75.0
2 73.54 73.35 73.4
5 72.93 70.8 7 71.9 0 69.75 72.98 71.3 7
T9 - 100.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 100.0 0 100.0 0 100. 00 86.35 83.2 7 84.8 1 82.70 81.36 82.C
3
Tio - 100.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 100.0 0 100.0 0 100. 00 100.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 100.0 0 100.0 0 100 00
Tn — — — — — — — — — — — —
Among the herb icidal t reatmer its T5, T4, T3, 1 [2 recorded higher weed control eff iciency over
Ti, T6, T7 and T8 at 15, 30, 45 and 60 DAHA. All Oxyflourfen 20% DF formulation treatments except Ti recorded significantly lower number oiEclipta alba population than all the standard checks used in the experiment.
Table 27: Effect of treatment on weed control efficiency against Ludwigia parviflora at different DAHA

Tre atm ents Dos
e 15 DAHA 30 DAHA 45 DAHA 60 DAHA

2017 -18 2018 -19 Me an 2017 -18 2018 -19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me an
Ti 800 g/ha 78.62 77.81 78.2 1 76.58 76.0 7 76.3 3 75.11 74.5 4 74.8
2 75.35 73.3 1 74. 33
T2 1000 g/ha 79.90 78.87 79.3 9 78.87 78.3 7 78.6
2 77.91 78.2 3 78.0 7 80.53 77.7 6 79. 14
T3 1200 g/ha 80.21 79.99 80.1 0 79.20 78.8 6 79.0
3 78.08 78.7
2 78.4 0 79.44 79.2 6 79.
35
T4 2400 g/ha 81.92 81.72 81.8
2 80.21 79.4
7 79.8 4 79.98 79.8 8 79.9
3 80.96 80.0 8 80.
52
T5 3600 g/ha 84.42 82.44 83.4
3 82.52 81.7 1 82.1
2 81.75 82.2 9 82.0
2 82.58 81.0
3 81. 81
T6 1000
ml/h
a 78.09 76.31 77.2 0 76.12 74.8 7 75.4 9 75.98 75.5
2 75.7
5 76.96 76.5 9 76. 78
T7 2000
ml/h
a 77.20 75.59 76.4 0 75.07 73.2 3 74.1
5 73.91 73.5 0 73.7 1 75.12 74.2 3 74. 68
T8 5000
ml/h
a 76.89 75.23 76.0 6 74.37 72.5 6 73.4 6 73.10 72.4 1 72.7
5 75.06 71.2 7 73. 17

T9 - 100.0 0 100.0 0 100. 00 100.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 76.17 77.0
5 76.6 1 74.54 73.7 0 74. 12
Tio - 100.0 0 100.0 0 100. 00 100.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 100.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 100.0 0 100. 00 100 .00
Tn — — — — — — — — — — — —
Among the herbicidal treatments T5, T4, T3, T2 recorded higher weed control efficiency over
Ti, T6, T7 and T8 at 15, 30, 45 and 60 DAHA. All Oxyflourfen 20% DF formulation treatments
except Ti recorded significantly lower number of Ludwiga parviflora population than all the
standard checks used in the experiment.
Table 28: Effect of treatment on weed control efficiency against Marsilea spp. at different DAHA

Tre atm ents Dose 15 DAHA 30 DAHA 45 DAHA 60 DAHA

2017 -18 2018 -19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me an 2017-18 2018 -19 Me an
Ti 800 g/ha 77.6 8 77.3 3 77.5 1 76.43 75.76 76.0 9 75.41 76.87 76.1 4 74.43 74.3
2 74.3 8
T2 1000 g/ha 79.8 8 79.8 0 79.8 4 76.59 77.41 77.0 0 77.78 77.89 77.8 3 76.09 76.0 6 76.0 7
T3 1200 g/ha 79.4 0 79.8
5 79.6
2 76.37 77.89 77.1 3 78.14 79.17 78.6 6 76.83 76.5 3 76.6 8
T4 2400 g/ha 81.5
3 81.8 9 81.7 1 80.50 80.92 80.7 1 81.44 83.77 82.6 0 80.34 81.8
7 81.1 1
T5 3600 g/ha 84.6
3 82.5 1 83.5 7 84.15 82.20 83.1
7 83.24 84.76 84.0 0 82.81 83.3 4 83.0 8
T6 1000 ml/ha 82.3 1 81.7
3 82.0
2 76.06 76.81 76.4
3 77.03 77.74 77.3 9 75.12 75.9 4 75.5 3
T7 2000 ml/ha 75.7
2 78.3 3 77.0 3 76.03 76.00 76.0 1 76.61 76.67 76.6 4 75.23 74.5 0 74.8 6
T8 5000 ml/ha 74.7 7 76.2 3 75.5 0 72.64 73.38 73.0 1 71.36 71.86 71.6 1 69.28 70.1
3 69.7 1
T9 - 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100.0 0 100.0 0 100. 00 86.63 89.23 87.9
3 83.27 84.6
3 83.9
5
Tio - 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100.0 0 100.0 0 100. 00 100.0 0 100.0 0 100. 00 100.0 0 100. 00 100 00
Tn — — — — — — — — — — — —
Among the herb icidal ti •eatmen ts T5.1 r4, T3, T 2 and Tf ; recon led high er weec contn 3I efficie ncy
) over Ti, T7 and Ts at 15 DAHA whereas at 30, 45 and 60 DAHA, T5, T4, T3, T2 recorded higher weed control efficiency over Ti, T6, T7 and Ts. All Oxyflourfen 20% DF formulation treatments except Ti recorded significantly lower number of Marsilea spp. population than all the standard checks used in the experiment.

EFFECT ON GROWTH AND YIELD PARAMETERS
Plant height; Heights of ten earmarked plants from each plot were measured at harvest. The height was taken from the ground level to the tip of the plant. The mean values of height were determined for each plot at different stages and used for statistical analysis.
> Number of panicles m2; Total number of panicles from 5 randomly selected hills in each plot
was counted at maturity and then converted into number of panicles m"2 for each plot.
Length of panicle (cm); At harvest, ten panicles from each plot were randomly selected and length of panicle was measured from base of the panicle to the tip. Average length of the panicles was recorded and expressed in cm.
) Number of grains panicle1; The number of filled grains from ten panicles randomly selected from each plot was counted and average number of grains panicle-1 was determined.
Test Weight (g); weight of 100 seeds (g).
Grain yield; The sun dried grains obtained after threshing and cleaning from the harvested area of each plot were weighed for recording grain yield in each plot. The grain yield thus
> obtained was then converted into kg hectare"1 for each plot.
Table 29: Effect of treatments on plant height, number of panicles and panicle length of paddy crop at harvest

Tre atm ents Dose Plant height (cm) Number of panicles/m2 Panicle length (cm)

2017 -18 2018 -19 Mean 2017 -18 2018 -19 Mean 2017 -18 2018 -19 Mean
Ti 800 g/ha 86.4 86.8 73.7 282 288 285 20.7 21.1 20.9
T2 1000 g/ha 95.6 96.0 79.8 299 311 305 23.3 24.3 23.8
T3 1200 g/ha 97.5 98.1 81.9 306 321 314 23.3 24.5 23.9
T4 2400 g/ha 98.0 98.6 82.7 315 327 321 23.8 24.8 24.3
T5 3600 g/ha 99.2 100.
2 83.8 322 338 330 24.7 25.9 25.3
T6 1000 ml/ha 94.3 94.5 79.0 273 279 276 21.5 22.0 21.7
T7 2000 ml/ha 92.2 92.7 77.5 268 274 271 19.8 20.3 20.0
T8 5000 ml/ha 87.0 87.2 73.8 247 252 250 19.4 19.8 19.6
T9 - 97.7 98.3 81.9 316 329 322 23.2 24.1 23.7

Tio - 100.
1 100. 7 83.8 326 343 335 24.8 26.0 25.4
Tn - 76.9 77.6 66.7 222 226 224 18.2 18.6 18.4
SEm
(±) - 1.68 1.77 2.02 10.4 10.8 10.6 0.5 0.6 0.6
CD
at
5% 4.95 5.22 5.94 30.7 31.8 31.3 1.6 1.9 1.7
CV
(%) - 3.12 3.27 4.44 6.24 6.25 6.25 4.24 4.86 4.52
Among the herbicide treatment T5, T4, T3, T2 recorded higher plant height over T6, Ti, T7 and Ts but T5, T4, T3, T2 were at par among themselves.
Among the herbicide treatment T5, T4, T3, T2 recorded higher Number of panicles over T6, Ti, T7 and Ts but T5, T4, T3, T2 were at par among themselves.
i Among the herbicide treatment T5, T4, T3, T2 recorded higher Panicle length over T6, Ti, T7 and Ts but T5, T4 T3, T2 were at par among themselves.
Table 30: Effect of treatments on number of grains /panicle, test weight and grain yield of paddy crop at harvest

Tre atm ents Dose Number of grains /panicle Test weight (g) Grain yield (kg/ha)

2017-18 2018-19 Mean 2017-18 2018-19 Mean 2017-18 2018-19 Mean
Ti 800 g/ha 96.2 98.1 97.1 20.17 20.57 20.37 3260 3325 3292
T2 1000 g/ha 103.2 105.7 104.4 21.23 22.08 21.66 3623 3768 3696
T3 1200 g/ha 105.3 110.6 108.0 21.65 22.73 22.19 3700 3885 3792
T4 2400 g/ha 106.0 110.2 108.1 21.65 22.52 22.08 3806 3958 3882
T5 3600 g/ha 110.0 115.5 112.8 22.10 23.21 22.65 3892 4086 3989
T6 1000 ml/ha 97.5 99.8 98.7 20.33 20.80 20.57 3508 3589 3548
T7 2000 ml/ha 92.7 94.9 93.8 19.97 20.45 20.21 3205 3348 3276
T8 5000 ml/ha 88.1 89.8 88.9 19.60 19.99 19.80 3140 3203 3171
T9 - 102.6 106.7 104.7 19.62 20.40 20.01 3773 3924 3849
Tio ~ 108.8 115.2 112.0 21.85 22.94 22.40 3935 4132 4033
Tn ~ 75.7 77.2 76.4 17.92 18.28 18.10 2005 2045 2025
SEm (±) ~ 2.9 3.0 3.0 0.57 0.68 0.61 149 153 150

CD 8.5 9.0 8.7 1.68 2.00 1.81 438 451 443
at ~
5%
CV 5.05 5.16 5.10 4.81 5.51 5.07 7.48 7.42 7.40
(%)
Among the herbicide treatment T5, T4, T3, T2 recorded higher Number of grains/panicle over T6, Ti, T7 and Ts but T5, T4, T3, T2 were at par among themselves.
Among the herbicide treatment T5, T4, T3, T2 recorded higher Test weight over T6, Ti, T7 and Ts but T5, T4, T3, T2 were at par among themselves.
i The highest grain yield was obtained with T5 and it was followed by T4, T3 and T2. The percentage increase in grain yield was recorded with T5 (97.0%), T4 (91.7%), T3 (87.3%), T2 (82.5%) which were much higher than T6, T7 and T8.
Table 31: Phyto-toxicity studies of 20% DF Oxyfluorfen on paddy crop

Tre atm ents Dose Epinasty Hyponasty Necrosis Vein clearing Wilting

201 7-18 201 8-19 201 7-18 201 8-19 201 7-18 201 8-19 201 7-18 201 8-19 201 7-18 201 8-19
Ti 800 g/ha 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T2 1000 g/ha 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T3 1200 g/ha 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T4 2400 g/ha 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T5 3600 g/ha 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0-No Phyto-toxicity 10-Complete kill the plant
As shown in above table that 20% DF Oxyfluorfen at any dose did not show any phyto-toxicity symptoms of on epinasty, hyponasty, necrosis, vein clearing, and wilting and leaf mortality at any stage of the paddy crop growth.

We Claim:

1. A dry flowable herbicidal formulation comprising:
a) 15 to 25% w/w of Oxyfluorfen; and
b) excipients selected from the group consisting of dispersing agent, dispersing cum wetting agent, disintegrating agent, fillers and mixtures thereof.

2. The dry flowable herbicidal formulation, as claimed in claim 1, wherein, the dispersing agent is present in an amount in the range from 1 to 20% w/w and is selected from sodium lignosulphonate, sodium salt of sulfomethylated lignosulfonic acid or a combination thereof.
3. The dry flowable herbicidal formulation, as claimed in claim 1, wherein, the dispersing cum wetting agent is present in an amount in the range from 1 to 15% w/w and is selected from sodium salt of alkyl naphthalene sulphonate, sodium polycarboxylate or a combination thereof.
4. The dry flowable herbicidal formulation, as claimed in claim 1, wherein, the disintegrating agent is present in an amount in the range from 0.1 to 5% w/w and is citric acid.
5. The dry flowable herbicidal formulation, as claimed in claim 1, wherein, the filler is present in an amount in the range from 10 to 80% w/w and is selected from china clay or ammonium sulphate or a combination thereof.
6. The dry flowable herbicidal formulation, as claimed in claim 1, wherein the composition is selected from a group comprising:

a) 20% w/w of Oxyfluorfen, 11% w/w of dispersing agent, 5% w/w of dispersing cum wetting agent, 0.30% w/w of disintegrating agent and 63.70 % w/w filler;
b) 15% w/w of Oxyfluorfen, 8.50% w/w of dispersing agent, 3.50% w/w of dispersing cum wetting agent, 0.20% w/w of disintegrating agent and 72.80 % w/w filler; and
c) 25% w/w of Oxyfluorfen, 13.50% w/w of dispersing agent, 6.50% w/w of dispersing cum wetting agent, 0.40% w/w of disintegrating agent and 54.60 % w/w filler.

7. A process for preparing the dry flowable herbicidal formulation as claimed in claim 1, comprising the steps of:
a) mixing all the excipients in a pre-blender to form a homogenous mixture;
b) adding oxyfluorfen and grinding in air classifier mill/air jet mill;
i c) adding requisite quantity of water to make a dough and passing through extruder mill
maintained to produce granules;
d) drying the granules obtained in step (c) in a dryer to obtain dried granules; and
e) sieving the dried granules obtained in step (d) to obtain dried granules as per laid down specification.
) 8. The dry flowable herbicidal formulation, as claimed in claim 7, wherein, in step b)
material is milled till the particle size below 10 micron (D90) is obtained; in step c) 10-20% water is added to prepare the dough; in step c) the RPM of extruder is 20-25 and temperature is not more than 50°C; in step d) air flow in Fluid Bed Dryer is between 75-80% with temperature of the air at not more than 50°C; in step d) material is dried
> till the moisture content in the granules is reduced to 3%.