Violating the laid down Government norms, the Chief Electoral Officer, Delhi has spent more than Rs33.92 crore for arranging Assembly polls in 2013 and lok Sabha polls in 2014. Now the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) has raised serious objections to wasteful expenditure without prior sanctions from the Finance Department of Delhi Government. CAG has sought comments from CEO of Delhi since CEO was not authorised to pay advance bills without sanctions from a competent authority.
The advance payments were made to five-star hotels and others for the meetings and hiring cabs that were held during the run-up to the last Assembly polls. More importantly, Delhi Government’s Finance Department has also declined to accord the approval to this huge expenditure. Strangely, the Chief Electoral Office has not settled the expenditures since 2010. During the scrutiny of the records of CEO Delhi, it was noticed that the advance payment to the tune of Rs33,92,39,835 for the year 2010-11; 2011-12; 2012-13 and 2013-14 were yet to be adjusted. In some cases, the CEO office has paid in advance and balance amount yet to be settled.
“For instance, a meeting was organised at India Habitat Centre on December 27, 2010 and amount is yet to be settled as only Rs87,324 was paid and rest of amount of Rs90,452 is yet to be adjusted. Similarly, an amount of Rs6,45,700 (Bill 197/ July 17, 2013) is yet to be adjusted in the case of Centre for Study Development,” the CAG said. The CEO office has spent Rs1 lakh under head of ‘petty expenditure’. The amount of Rs4,49,330 to Mahanagar Telephone Nigam is also not adjusted till date. Joint Chief Electoral Officer Survir Singh had spent Rs86,400 in November 2013 and that amount has not been adjusted till date. According to CAG, the amount of Rs84 lakh in 2013 and Rs83 lakh of DTC in the year 2014 is yet to be adjusted.
CAG said that that the CEO has made advance payment two five-star hotels — Hotel Samrat and Taj Hotel — and to Indian Habitat Centre. He has also made advance payment to various Government agencies — New Delhi Municipal Council, Delhi Transport Department, Delhi Municipal Corporations, Post Office, Delhi Jal Board, Centre for Study Development, NIC, Delhi Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation and Intelligent Communication Systems India limited and MTNl — and a private car company Maruti Suzuki.
The CAG also pointed out that Rs9.21 lakh, Rs6.63 lakh, Rs21.25 lakh and Rs33.55 crore pertains to the years 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013, respectively. CAG stated, “According to Rule 159 of General Finance Rules, ordinarily, payment for services rendered or supplies made should be released only after the services have been rendered or supplies made. However, it may become necessary to make advance payments with permission from Finance Department.” The CAG also noted that while making any advance payment adequate safeguards in the form of bank guarantee should be obtained from the firm. The watch dog also stated, “…the advance should be adjusted within thirty days from the date of drawal.”
Taking strong exception, the audit agency also made a point that the special camps for registration of eligible citizens of Delhi in electoral rolls during summary revision, the cabs were hired from Delhi Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation at Rs1,160 per vehicle per day in spite of the fact that from open market one can avail for Rs860 per cab per day. “It was also notice that the CEO having six vehicles for general pool, the CEO office was required to utilise these vehicles’ instead of hiring from DTTDC,” the agency questioned.
According to CAG, no bank guarantee was obtained from the private parties thus, the Government interest was not properly safeguard by the controlling officer. “The non-submission of detailed account causes non-transparency in expenditure reporting system as money which were earlier drawn from Government exchequer does not properly accounted for as the purpose for which it was drawn cannot be vouched by the audit. Non-settlement of advances also carries with it the risk of fraud and misappropriation of public fund,” the CAG said in its observation.