NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT

CITY ZONE.

No.F._________/IAD/ZAP/CZ/2014/ Dated:

Sub:- Physical verification and test check audit report on the account of Nigam
Pharmacy Nigam Bodh Ghat City Zone,For the period 12.10.2010 to
23.01.2014.

Please find enclosed herewith the Audit Inspection Report on account of records of the
office of Nigam Pharmacy Nigam Boadh Ghat City Zone, for the period 12.10.2010 to
23.01.2014. Para wise replies/comments be sent to the office of the undersigned within a period
of the four weeks of the receipts of this report.

Internal Audit Officer

ZAP/City Zone
MO/In charge,
Nigam Pharmacy;
Nigam Bodh Ghat,
City Zone
 NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
CITY ZONE.

No. F__________/IAD/ZAP/CZ/2014/ Dated:-

Sub :- Physical verification and test check audit report on account of Nigam
Pharmacy,Nigam Bodh Ghat City Zone for the period 12.10.2010 to 23.01.2014.

INTRODUCTION:-

The I.A.R. on the accounts of nigam Pharmacy ,Nigam Bodh Ghat City Zone was
conducted by the ZAP/City Zone comprising of Sh. Manoj Kumar Naresh, I. A. O, Sh.J.Parsad,
A.A.O, Sh. Sandeep Vashist, Acctt. Asstt, and Sh. R.K.Yadav UDC. The audit was conducted
the period 23.01.2014 to 28.01.2014.

Sh. R.K Tyagi Pharmacist was holding the post of store keeper at the time of audit.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The main aim of the Nigam Pharmacy is manufacturing/purchase of Ayurvedic medicines

and issue of the same to all Ayurvedic Dispensaries under the jurisdiction of North Delhi
Municipal Corporation.

HOD/H.O.S/D.D.O’s/CASHIERS

The following officials have served as HOD//DDO/Cashier during

S. No. HOD Head of Office DDO Cashier

S/Shri/Ms. S/Shri/Ms. S/Shri/Ms.
1. Dr.Ranbir Singh Dr.Chander Ketu Sh.
Addl.Director Dr.Chander Ketu
Ayurvedic

Budget Allocation and Expenditure for the year2010-11 to 2012.13

Expenditure up to
Budget Head Year Budget allocation year ending

56-1098 2010-11 Rs.225.Lac Rs.98,61,575/-

56-1098 2011-12 Rs.700.Lac Rs.05,92,7,464/-

51-1098 2011-12 Rs.50.lac Rs.30,19,823/-

56-1098 2012-13 Rs.450.Lac Rs.20,01,804/-

51-1098 2012-13 Rs.75.Lac Rs.Nil

Statutory Audit:-

No audit report of statutory audit was provided to the audit party.

 Vacancy Statement:

S. No. Name of Post No. of Posts Filled Vacant

Sanctioned
1 Group A 01 01 Nil

2 Group B Nil Nil Nil

3 Group C 07 03 04

4 Group D 16 02 14

5 Daily Wager/Substitute 03 01 02

Maintenance of Records:-

Since most of the chain of records were either not maintained by the department
concerned or not produced to audit, the maintenance of records by the department
concerned cannot be considered as satisfactory for the period covered by the audit.
Old Audit Report

There were 104 audit paras outstanding in respect of Nigam Pharmacy. City Zone. The
department has not made compliance of these paras and as such nil paras have been settled.
These 104 paras have been incorporated with current audit report as part-I (old audit report)
(A)
S.No. Year Total Para Para No. of settled Outstanding Paras
Paras Settled paras with Para No.
Detailed in formA-9

B) Details of Old Recovery.

S.No. Year Total old Amount Recovered Balance Recovery
Recovery Against paras
Para No. Amount (Amount in Rs.
Para-wise)
1990-91 Rs.6408/- Rs.3239/ Rs/3169/-
to11.10.2010

Current Audit Report

Details of Current Recovery (Audit Period 12.10.2010 to 23.01.2014):-

Para No.’s Total Recoveries (in Rs.) Amount Recoveries Balance (in Rs.)
02 Rs.188/- Nil Rs188./-
03 Rs170./- Nil Rs.170/-

The Internal Audit Report has been prepared on the basis of information furnished and
records produced by the department concerned.

This party disclaims any responsibility for any misinformation and/of non-information on
the part of audittee.

IAO /ZAP/CZ
PART NO.-II (CURRENT AUDIT)

The following record was requisitioned for Audit/Scrutiny on test check basis vide letter
No.IAD/ZAP/CZ/2014, dated 23.01.2014.
1. Sock register book of medicines of raw material.
2. Stock book in respect of Medicine purchase
3. File of medicine of proprietorship
4. Purchase file
5. Indent issue of medicine/stationary
6. Property Register
7. PF & SB with ECRs
8. Imprest Register/contingency register
9. Local purchase case
10. Log book
11. Temporary Advance Register
12. List of Dispensaries and concoctor
13. E.M. register
14. Tender register with tender Files
15. NIT Register
16. Attendance register
17. G Books along /challans
18. Any other auditable records

PARA NO.-1 NON-PRODUCTION OF RECORDS

Out of the above requisitioned records, items at Sl. No. 02,04 (P),05,06,08 (Partly), &17
only were shown/produced to audit for verification and test check audit. Rest of the records
requisitioned vide above mentioned requisition was not produced to audit for inspection. Either
the record is not maintained or the production of the same appears to have been avoided, reasons
to which best known to the department. If, any irregularity/discrepancy is found in the non-
produced record, at any stage, the whole responsibility will lie on the department itself.

However, as a result of test check audit of the records whatever produced to audit, the
following discrepancies/omissions/errors etc., came to the notice of the audit.

Para No. 2 :- Municipal Loss of Rs. 188/-

During the physical verification of Store, the items of store as tabulated below were found
short. The shortage comes to Rs. 188/-, which may be made good by way of depositing the cost
of articles shown against each item in Mpl Treasury through G-8 book/challan under intimation
to audit.

Sl. Page Name of the As per As per site Shortage Rate Amount
No No.& item Stock Per unit
S.BYear. Book
1. 45 Band Aid 63800 no 63750 no 50 Rs.1.78/ Rs.89/-
2014-15
2. 51 Adhesive 231 230 01 Rs.99.75/ Rs.99.75/-
2014-15 Plaster
Total Rs.188/-

Para No.3: Casting of Balances (Loss of Rs 170/-)

During the scrutiny of the Stock book 2011-12(Patent) maintained by the department, the
following mistakes in computing balances/casting have been noticed:-
S. Page No./ Items O.Bal. Issue/ Bal. as Bal. Sh./Ex. Amount
No Date , S.B Recieve Per SB Should
. & year d be

33 dt Ferromax 16838 nil 16832 16838 06 short Rs.170/-

01 13.02.2012 no @28.33/-
S.B. 2011-
12

The shortage comes to Rs.170 /-(approx.), which may be made good by way of
depositing the cost of articles shown against each items in the Municipal Treasury immediately
through G8 books/Challans and intimate to audit.

PARA NO:-4 Late deposition of Municipal in to the Mpl.

Clause 4 of chapter II on Receipt and Payment of Mpl. Account Code Vol .I 1958 provides that
“All moneys receipt for credit to the Municipal Fund either in the sub-offices or the treasury
shall be remitted to the treasury or the Bank, as the case may be, the next day.”
During the course of audit while checking the G-8 books so produced to audit with
deposit challans, it was found that staff has deposited the Municipal fund after 24 hours as
mentioned under :-

S.N G-8 No Date Date of deposit Delay in

days
01 066615 to 066620 27.05.2013 14.06.2013 17 days
02 066621 28.05.2013 14.06.2013 16 days
03 066622 03.06.2013 14.06.2013 11 days
04 066623 04.06.2013 14.06.2013 10 days
05 066624 05.06.2013 14.06.2013 09 days
06 066626 to 066628 12.06.2013 02.07.2013 19 days
07 066629 to 0666230 20.09.2013 15.10.2013 24 days
08 066631 21.09.2013 15.10.2013 23 days
09 066632 to 066634 23.09.2013 15.10.2013 21 days
10 066635 24.09.2013 15.10.2013 20 days
11 066636 27.09.2013 15.10.2013 17 days
12 066637 01.10.2013 15.10.2013 13 days
13 066638 03.10.2013 15.10.2013 12 days
14 066639 01.10.2013 15.10.2013 14 days
15 066640 26.09.2013 15.10.2013 19 days

Reason for late deposition of money may be clarified to audit.

PARA NO.-5: IRREGULARITIES IN BUDGET WATCH REGISTER.

Budget register was maintained to record the expenditure incurred on various items of
expenditure under different heads of account. It should be maintained in prescribed standard
form to enable to keep watch over the progressive expenditure under different heads of account.
During the course of audit, the following irregularities were noticed in the maintenance of
Budget Register:-

1. Budget Register was not page numbered and certificate to the effect that the register
contains pages 1 to____was not given and initialed by the official maintaining it and
by any superior.
2. It was not maintained in the prescribed standard form. The complete detail of
expenditure such as dates, description of the expenditure, sanction/approval of the
authority, voucher/bill no etc. was not found.
3. Detail of Budget allocated under different heads of accounts from the HQ to the
Deptt. and also detail of subsequent allocations should be recorded in the register for
 ready reference so as to keep a watch over the expenditure but the required detail was
not given in the register.
4. Entries made in the budget register were not initialed by the official maintaining it
and also by the DDO

Non maintenance of the Budget Register in accordance with the prescribed procedure be
explained to audit.

PARA-6: NON-VERIFICATION OF REMITTANCE INTO MUNICIPAL TREASURY:

As per Para 22.3..2 of the CPWD Code for a payment made into treasury, a consolidated
receipt should be prepared in Form-5D for all those remittances made into the treasury and sent
to Zonal Accounts Branch & Zonal Treasury of the concerned zone for verification in the first
week of the month following the month to which the same pertains. But it was noticed that the
department failed to do so. No Income verification certificate was being maintained.

PARA NO.7 Other observation

1. The cutting and over writing not attested by the supervising staff.
2. No page no./stock book no.were found mentioned in the indents at the time of issuing of
medicine . So the cross check from indents to SB could not be done.
3. Paging certificate was not mentioned in the stock book.
4. In most of the cases neither issuing official nor the receiving official put their signatures.
5. From G-8 no 066609 to 066614 dated 22.05.2013 was shown as crossed ,but the reason
for the same not mentioned.

INTERNAL AUDIT OFFICER

IAD/ZAP/CZ
PARA NO.3: IMPROPER MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS OF SALE/ DOWN LOAD
OF TENDER DOCUMENT AND AMOUNT REALISED THEREOF.

Since the E-tendering system has been introduced in the MCD w.e.f. 2005 onwards, all
the tenderers participating in the tender are required to pay the requisite tender cost as decided by
the department.
During the course of audit of the department, it come to the notice that no record of
tender cost/fee was being maintained in the Division in respect of the sale/ download of tenders
and also the scrutiny of the tender filed disclosed that no document was kept in the tender file
from which it could be verified that the requisite tender cost had been paid by all the
participating tender. Due to non maintenance of record it could not be ascertained that how many
tenders were sold during the audit period and how much amount was realized on a/c of sale/
download of tender documents. It is very serious lapse on the part of the department.
Department should maintain a register containing the detail of NIT wise sale/download of
tender documents, name of the person who has downloaded the tender document/ to whom
tender document issued amount realized on a/c of sale of tender documents etc. On one side of
the register computerized transactions list in which the detail of the contractors who have
downloaded the tender document is given, should be pasted and on the other side amount of
tender cost realized from the contractor along with DD number/G-8 number should be
mentioned. The register should be checked and verified by the Divisional officer concerned.
A list of the files scrutinized during the audit in which no document was kept w.r.t. the
deposition of requisite tender cost is annexed at ‘B’ as per the list recovery amounting Rs.
21,000/- on a/c of sale of tender documents is required to be effected. The case mentioned in the
list is only illustrative and not exhaustive. Similar discrepancies in other cases are not ruled out
hence EE concerned was therefore requested that the recovery action may be initiated to recover
the tender cost from the participating tenderers from the date of introduction of E-tendering
system to till date under intimation t o audit and the reason for the said irregularities be explained
and justified to audit. A Letter vide memo no. 08/IAD/ZAP/CZ/2013 dated 21.10.2013 was
issued to the department but no reply has been received so far.

PARA NO. 4: PAYMENT MADE TO CONTRACTORS WITHOUT EXERCISING

REQUIRED TEST CHECK BY EE.
As per the instructions contained in CPWD Manual, before authorizing final payment to
contractor, Executive Engineer should test check 10% of the measurement recorded by his
subordinates. On scrutiny of the account files/MB’s it come to the notice that in the following
cases payment had been made without exercising the required test check by EE.

1. w.o. no. 7 dated 11.6.2012 /MB no. 30095 Ist & final Bill Rs. 3,80,510/-
2. w.o. no. 3 dated 18.4.2012 /MB no. 30088 Ist & final Bill Rs. 2,82,207/-
3. w.o. no. 1 dated 18.4.2012/ MB no. 30086 Ist & final Bill Rs. 3,08,428/-
4. w.o. no. 2 dated 18.4.2012/MB no. 30087 Ist & final Bill Rs. 2,88,041/-

It is mandatory to exercise required test check of measurement by the EE before making

the payment as the EE is responsible for the correctness of the bill as a whole. Hence reason for
the above irregularity be explained and justified to audit. . A Letter vide memo no.
07/IAD/ZAP/CZ/2013 dated 21.10.2013 in this regard was issued to the department but no reply
has been received so far.
PARA NO.5: SHORTAGE OF RS 600/- NOTICED AS A RESULT OF PHYSICAL
VERIFICATION WITH THE STATIONARY REGISTER OF STHE DEPARTMENT.
(LOSS OF RS 600/-)

While conducting the physical verification of Stationary, the shortages found in the Stock
Register as tabulated below. The shortage approximately comes to Rs.600/- which may be made
good by way of depositing the cost of articles shown against each item in the Municipal Treasury
through G-8 Book/ Challans and shown to audit.

S.No. Page Stock- Item As per As per Short @ Amount

No. Book for S.B site Rate
the year
01 18 2012-13 Noting Sheet 02 01 01 35/- 35/-
pad
02 27 do File Pad 300 250 50 6.5 325/-
03 62 do Copier paper 02 01 01 160 160/-
04 79 do Service Book 03 02 01 50 50/-
05 89 do Dak Book 05 04 01 30 30/-
Total: Rs.600/-

PARA NO.6: IRREGULARITIES IN G-8,BILL FORM & MB STOCK REGISTER( 2012-

13& 2013-14).

The head of the office shall maintain the G-8 register, Bill Form register & MB stock
register of wherein all the G-8, Bill Form & MB received from the HQ and further its
subsequent issue to the officials of the deptt, Should be recorded.

During the course of audit of the above mentioned Stock Registers the following
irregularities were noticed:-
1. On dated 30.4.2012 two numbers of MB’s vide MB number 30089 & 30090 were
issued against work order no. 23 dated 01.12.2011 to Sh. Manish Huniya JE instead
of one MB at a time.
2. On dated 15.5.2013 the balance of MB’s shown 30 but issue made after 15.5.2013
and no balance has been worked out in the register.
3. Signature of recipient of Bill Form no. 7970 dated 19.9.2013 was not available in the
register. Furthermore the entry of Bill Form no. 7971 found missing as Bill Form no.
7972 was issued on dated 25,9,2013 after issue of Bill Form no. 7970 on dated
19.9.2013.
4. No paging was done after page no. 31 and no paging certificate given in the
beginning of the register by the competent authority.
5. No periodic check was done by the competent authority. No entry of G-8 receiving &
issuing for the year 2012-13 & 2013-14 was made in the registers. More over page
no. 25 of the register found blank.
6. There were so many cuttings/ overwriting in the entries of issue without attestation by
the authority competent in the above mentioned registers.
7. Name designation, signature of the official issuing the bill form was not found in the
register.
8. Bill Form register should be verified by the concerned Divisional Accountant at least
once in a month and Ex.Engg. in three months but the procedure as contained in
circular no. E-in-C/Engg/HQ/RK.2005/2246 dated 15.3.2005 was not being strictly
adhered to.
9. MB’s /Bill Form were being issued without proper requisition from the recipient.

The competent authority may look into the matter and issue necessary directions to the
official concerned for proper maintenance and upkeep of the above mentioned registers.

PARA NO. 7: IRREGULARITIES IN PAID VOUCHER’S(PLAN& NON PLAN)

 On scrutiny of vouchers 2012-13 (Plan & Non Plan) the following irregularities were
come to the notice of audit:-
1. Copy of demand should be attached with the paid vouchers but during the course of audit
it came to the notice that copy of demand was not enclosed with the paid vouchers and
also same was not made available to audit for scrutiny.
2. During the course of audit of paid vouchers under Plan Head for the period under audit it
came to notice that the payment had been made without affixing budget slip on the
contractor’s bills due to that it could not be ascertained whether the payment was released
as per the budget allocation or not.
3. Detail w.r.t. voucher of transfer/RTGS, cheque no, date, demand no, Head of A/C was
not given in the Cash Book due to which release of demand from time to time could not
be ascertained.
4. As per Govt. of India’s instructions, any payment exceeding Rs. 5000/- shall be made
only after taking the acknowledgement of the recipient on a Revenue stamp of Rs.1/-. A
review of the paid vouchers revealed that there were a number of the cases where
payment exceeding Rs. 5,000/- had been made without affixing revenue stamps on the
bill. Some of the voucher’s detail (Plan & Non Plan) in which Revenue stamp found not
affixed are annexed at “C”.
5. Voucher no. 45, 49 to 52,59,60,81,82,89,90,103 to 105,107 & 108 of Non Plan 2012-13
were found missing and not provided by the department.

PARA NO.8: SHORT DEPOSIT IN MPL. TREASURY (LOSS OF RS. 150/-).

During the course of scrutiny of G-8 Book no. 1176201 to 1176300, it comes to the notice
of audit that collections made vide G-8 no. 1176240 to 1176246 on 13.01.2012 deposited in
Mpl. Treasury on dated 18.01.2012 found short by Rs. 150/- as total collection on dated
13.01.2012 comes to Rs. 2,17,950/- instead of Rs. 2,17,800/-.
A memo vide no. 06/IAD/ZAP/CZ/2013 Dated 14.10.2013 was issued to the department for
depositing the said amount in to Mpl Treasury but no reply has been received from the
department so far.
The same may be deposited in to Mpl. Treasury under intimation to audit.

PARA NO.9: IRREGULARITIES/DISCREPANCIES NOTICED IN THE WORK

ORDER.

W.O. No.01 dated 18.4.2012, M/S D.K.Const.Co. Khatri Const. Co., NOW- Corridor
Improvement of SPM Marg. S/H: Improvement of ramp of cycle track.

(a) Cement invoice placed in the file was not signed by the Contractor as well as JE /AE
concerned.
(b) As per cement register 500 bags of cement received on dated 02.5.2012 and issued to
site 86 bags, 74 bags, 208 bags and 78 bags respectively on different dates and
balance of 44 bags returned to the contractor as per cement register, but total of these
comes to 490 bags only. Whereabouts of the remaining 10 bags of cement may be
clarified.
(c) All the entries in the cement register were made with pencil with some overwriting
theron. More over the signature of JE found available at the time of closing of cement
register only.
(d) As per cement consumption statement prepared by JE, 448 bags of cement shown
issued to the work but in the cement register it shows 446 bags only, needs
clarification.
(e) Numbered cement register printed in municipal press was not used by the
department. Cement registered printed in the Mpl. Press should be used. Register was
not page numbered and also not signed by issuing clerk/ Accountant/JE/AE on the
register.
(f) Detailed completion report was not filled up though the final payment had been made
to the contractor.
(g) Completion certificate was not signed by any of the official/ officer.
(h) Labour report was not enclosed in the file. The recovery of Rs. 400/- @ Rs. 200/- per
fortnight may be recovered from the contractor.
 (i) Water charges @ 1% of the gross amount ie, 1% of Rs. 4, 57,953/- (Rs. 4,579/-) may
be recovered from contractor as there was no any document regarding was placed in
the file from which it could be ascertained that the contractor had made his own
arrangement of water. More over ½% (Rs.2,290/-) may also be recovered i/r of
drinking water as there was no any certificate regarding providing of drinking water
to the labour found in the file.
(j) No test check report /statement was found available in the file.

WORK ORDER NO.02 dated 18.04.12, Tender No. 147728, M/S D.K.Const. Co., Tender
amount Rs. 289477/- Contractual amount Rs. 429815/- NOW: Coridor Imp. of SPM Marg.
SH: I/M of cycle track foot path near parcel office of Old Delhi Railway Station.

1. Work Order was issued on 18.4.2012 but agreement was executed on dated
13.8.2012 i.e after four months whereas it should have been executed within
10 days of issue of work order.
2. In MB, test check was not done by EE.
3. All the entries in the cement register were made by pencil with some
overwriting theron. More over the signature of JE found available at the time
of closing of cement register only
4. Labour report not found available in the file.
5. Completion certificate was not signed by any of the officer i.e. JE/AE/EE.

WORK ORDER NO.4. DATED 23.05.12: Name of Contractor-M/s Natraj Const. Co. NIT
No. 27, SH: Imp. of boundary wall in front of slum and cluster in Ranjeet Singh Road in
CZ, Tender amount Rs. 3,82,000/- Contractual amount Rs. 4,96,562/-.

1. Test check had not been found carried out by EE in the MB.
2. Water Charges @ 1% of Rs. 4, 91,169/- i.e. Rs. 4,911/- was not deducted
from the bill. Since the document placed in the file from which it could be
ascertained that the contractor had arranged water himself.
3. All the entries in the cement register was made by pencil with some
overwriting thereon. More over the signature of JE found available at the time
of closing of cement register only.
4. Labour report found blank in the file.
5. Completion certificate not signed by any of the officer ie JE/AE/EE.

WORK ORDER NO. 09 DATED 09.10.12: M/S Ram Parkash, 316 sainik Vihar, Tender
amount Rs. 2, 92,023/- Contractual amount Rs. 4, 22,119/- S/H Making provision for
security arrangement at the premises of Mahila Haat.

1. Bill no. 3417 (First & Final Bill ) had been passed for Rs. 3,66,598/- but in MB it was shown
as Rs. 3,56,598/- after deduction of withheld amount of Rs. 10,000/- which was not shown in
the bill, more over in the back side of the Agreement the amount was shown Rs. 3,56,598/- by
overwriting. It may be clarified to audit whether the contractor had been paid Rs. 3, 66,598/-
or Rs. 3, 56,598/-.
IF he had been paid Rs. 3, 66,598/-, then recovery of Rs. 10,000/- may be made
2. Labour report found blank in the file.
3. Water charges @ 1% of gross amount of Rs. 4, 20,765/- (Rs. 4,208/-) may be recovered from
contractor. Since the document placed in the file from which it could be ascertained that the
Contractor had arranged water himself. More over ½% (Rs.2,104/-) may also be recovered i/r
of drinking water as there was no certificate regarding providing of drinking water to the labour
found in the file.
4. Signature of EE was not found available in the Test Check Report.

Work Order No.26 dated 12.12.2011, Name of Agency- M/S Pankaj Contractor &
Engineering
 1. No Lab test report was found available in the accounts file.

2. The Agreement No. AA 640758 placed in the file was not filled up. Earnest Money & G-
8 no. and date of execution of Agreement was not found.

3. Test Check Statement and labor report was not placed in the file.

4. As no record/document regarding provision of water for construction as well as drinking

water was placed in the file, Hence the recovery @ 1%, i.e Rs. 4347/- and ½% as
drinking water ie Rs.2171/- may be made from the contractor.

Work order No. 03 dated 18.4.2012, H/A-XL-VIII-M, Tender Amt.Rs. 2,85,877/- Tender
No. 147733.S/H- Fasia Imp. and pvd. Main gate of Gym in CZ.

1. Test Check Statement and labour report was not placed in the file.

2. As no record/document regarding provision of water for Construction as well as

drinking water was placed in the file, hence the recovery on @ 1% i.e Rs.2859/- and
½% as drinking water i.e. Rs.1430/- may be made from the contractor.

3. No test check found available in MB no. 30088 by EE.

Work Order No. 07 dated 11.6.2012 H/A-93-3018, Tender Amt. Rs. 3,82,134/- SH- Const. of
Chambers on storm water, drain water at petrol pump side on JLN Marg.

1. No cement bill of 500 bags was placed in the file.

2. No Test Check Statement was placed in the file.
3. No water bill or related document found available in the file, hence recovery on
a/c of water charges amounting Rs. 4968/- may be deducted from the bill of the
contractor.
4. As per Bill form no. 3415, there were 11 number of items shown with total
amount of Rs. 3,80,510/- but in the completion certificate only 10 items for the
same amount were shown as one item at serial no. 18 was not shown in the
completion certificate. The work was awarded with the 20 numbers of the items
but only 11 items executed in the said work, needs clarification.

Reason for above said irregularities may be clarified to audit.

PARA NO. 10: SANCTION PAPERS OF MUSTER ROLL EMPLOYEES

During the course of audit, the documents relating to the initial appointment of Muster
Roll employees were asked for by the audit for scrutiny but were not produced. In the absence of
such record, the authenticity and genuineness of the employees engaged in the division cannot be
cross-checked.

The competent authority is requested to clarify the same and a proper record of Muster
Rolls employees engaged in the division be got maintained, (if it is not previously maintained).
Otherwise, in case of any irregularity found at a later stage, the responsibility shall lie on the
department itself. Further it may also be ensured that no undue payment to muster roll employees
has been made.

PARA NO. 11: LATE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT:

As per CPWD Manual, the agreement between the Divisional office and contractor who
are mutually come under any contract should be executed/signed within seven days from the date
of issue of work order by the office. But during the scrutiny of accounts files, it was found that in
most of the cases, the agreement between the contractor and the MCD was executed after a long
gap after issuance of Work Order. This needs proper attention and this practice should be
avoided in future.

PARA-12: NON-VERIFICATION OF REMITTANCE INTO MUNICIPAL TREASURY:

As per Para 22.3..2 of the CPWD Code for a payment made into treasury, a consolidated
receipt should be prepared in Form-5D for all those remittances made into the treasury and sent
to Zonal Accounts Branch & Zonal Treasury of the concerned zone for verification in the first
week of the month following the month to which the same pertains. But it was noticed that the
department failed to do so. No Income verification certificate was being maintained.

PARA NO.-13: IMPROPER MAINTENANCE OF THE S.B/PERSONAL FILES.

During the course of test check of PF & SBs of the officers/officials it was found that PF
& SBs were not being maintained in a proper way. Necessary entries page-wise were not being
done and paging of files was also not done. While test checking of the PFs & SBs the following
irregularities were noticed by audit.

(I) PF & SB OF SH. JAI SINGH S/O SH. KILLO RAM BELDAR

a. Column no.08 to 12 (Increment) of the service book were not completed.

b. DDO’s signature were not found available in the leave sheet.
c. As per Office Order No. IV-Engg/ Esstt/96/236 dated 29.01.1996,
appointment was on purely temporary and probation period of one year.
The clearance of probation period successfully was not placed in the file.

(II) PF & SB OF SH. ROOP PRASHAD S/O SH. NARAYAN DUTT MATE
Column no.08 to 12 (Increment ) of the service book were not completed.

(III) PF & SB OF SH. SATYA VIR SINGH S/O SH. SUKHAN SINGH AE
a. At page no. 04 of SB education certificate entries were not filled up.
b. Advance of Rs. 25,000/- for purchase of scooter was granted vide o.o.
no. MCA/Adv.98-99/3300 dated 12.11.1999 refundable in 50
installments but it was not clear from the SB wether the full amount of
advance were refunded or not.

PARA NO.- 14: OTHER AUDIT OBSERVATIONS:

In the Budget Register 2013-14, Imprest register, Postage register, Cheque register and
Advance register following common irregularities were noticed by audit:-
1. The register were not page numbered and paging certificate was not given in the
beginning of the registers.
2. No periodic check was done by the authority competent.
3. Cutting/overwriting was noticed in some of the entries in the registers without
attestation.
4. In the Budget Register 2013-14 (LA Road) some mandatory columns were not filled
up.
5. In Postage Register Bill passed for Rs. 474/-(serial no. 24 to 45) dated 23.5.2013 to
28.6.2013 as shown in the register but sanction of the same was not obtained from
EE. More over at s.n o. 65 letter post on 12.9.2013 but at s.no. 66 to 70 postage slip
pasted for dated 03.9.2013 & 04.9.2013 needs clarification.
6. Advance of Rs. 11, 94,562/- drawn vide approval of Addl Comm. (Engg) NDMC
dated 27.8.2012 on a/c of new electric connection in favor of BSES Yamuna Power
Ltd. has not been adjusted till the date of start of audit.
 Clarifications to the above mentioned irregularities may be given to the audit at the
earliest.

INTERNAL AUDIT OFFICER

IAD/ZAP/CZ