Reports of the Comptroller & Auditor General of India for the year 1997, 1998 and 1999 (Union Govt., Civil, Performance appraisals report No. 3) have been reviewed and comments are offered as under :-

It has been made amply clear that there is a lot of scope in execution and monitoring of Centrally Sponsored Schemes. It is obvious from the reports that State Govts. are not executing the schemes with the objective to achieve the goals set for the same. However, there is failure on the part of Govt. of India also, in effectively monitoring the qualitative and quantitative achievements reported by concerned State Govts.

OBSERVATIONS :

1. Physical and financial targets should have same time frame. Otherwise, it is difficult to establish linkages between them.
2. In all Central Sponsored Schemes, State Govts. are expected to contribute part of expenditure, as decided by Govt. of India and accepted by State Govts. However, it has been noticed that even if Central Govt. releases its quota of funds, States are not contributing their part of fund. Therefore, there is shortage of fund for the scheme, which adversely affects the progress of such schemes. It is advisable to ensure that money to State Govts. is released only after getting an assurance in writing that funds, expected to be provided by State Govts. have been made available to the concerned authorities. Once this kind of assurance is received, Central Govt. may release its share of fund in accordance with phasing of the scheme which may be revised by Govt. of India as per administrative convenience. It is pertinent to mention that statement / report / accounts furnished by State Govt. should be treated as true as per the Indian Constitution (Act 261(1)) Therefore, observations of audit on wrong statement being furnished by State Govts. should be addressed to State Govt. concerned.
3. In majority of the schemes, Govt. of India is relying on execution, expertise and monitoring by concerned State Govt.. Govt. of India neither have the requisite man power nor expertise to implement these schemes on their own or implement them at field level. Therefore, deficiency in monitoring such schemes may be eradicated only if a decision is taken to reorganise the monitoring activities of nodal agencies and by providing adequate man power to them.
4. Wherever scheme is required to be executed through some Fund, it should be made compulsory to ensure that such funds are created by concerned State Govts. and money is released by Govt. of India after ascertaining this fact. In fact, transfer of money from Govt. of India may be made to State Govt. effecting such accounting adjustment, so that money may directly be credited to relevant Major Head (assigned to Fund in question). Further, it will also be advisable to get the monthly statement from the executing agency about utilisation of funds. This may reduce possibility of diversion of funds.

: 2 :

 

5. In several cases, it has been pointed out by audit that funds are not being released by Govt. of India to executing agencies in time. There is rush of expenditure in the month of March which is a known fact and has been objected to by internal audit and C&AG audit. Unfortunately, observations of audit are not taken seriously by the executives. The need is felt to make the executives countable for such releases.
6. Why Govt. of India should sponsor and monitor schemes? With the known constraints, it will be better-off by releasing grants to States or giving more funds directly to States for execution of Centrally Sponsored Schemes. After all these schemes are formulated to cater to the demands of people living in the States. State Govt. should be left to manage such schemes.