news details |
|
|
| `It has been crying from rooftops about Govt's failure' | | Govt claims on CAG taken with a pinch of salt | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Feb 13: Immediately after delivering the budget speech, the concerned Minister addressed the media. Most of the remarks of the minister were taken with a pinch of salt especially his claim about the CAG. "Even the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India has in unambiguous terms patted the State for its internal resources mobilization initiatives," he said.
However, the following examples reflect the hollowness of the minister's claims. The CAG took the state government to task in its 2013 audit report. The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) audit report, 2013 has brought to the fore this glaring example of non-performance of the Rural Development Department in terms of the implementation of the MGNREGA scheme.
"Maintain 60:40 ratio for wage and material as per the operational guidelines. Inadmissible works will not be taken up. Keeping in view the low work completion rate, prepare a concrete policy for incomplete and abandoned work," the report said. In the same report the CAG revealed that no disaster management setup existed in the state for immediate restoration of transmission system in the event of any major electricity failure or fault. Further out of 54 Grid Sub-Stations, generator backup is available in only 37 sub-stations.
Pertinently, Union Power Ministry has been regularly asking the state to increase revenue from electricity, bring down power purchase bill and Transmission and Distribution (T&D) losses, which were currently around 60 to 65 per cent and initiate other reforms. The Roshni scam came to fore after CAG indicted J&K IAS officers for their "involvement" in the Roshni scam and "non-cooperation" with the auditors in a report to be submitted to the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly in the coming Budget session. CAG also mentioned the names of bureaucrats namely Financial Commissioner, Revenue, Arun Kumar; Secretary, Revenue, Vinod Kaul; and Secretary, Administrative Reforms, Ghulam Hassan Tantray. Chief Secretary Iqbal Khanday and Principal Secretary, Finance, Bharat Bhushan Vyas for allegedly not cooperating in the audit.
Pertinently, the total earnings under the scheme, once estimated to fetch the State Rs 25000 crore, have not crossed even Rs 80 crore more than 12 years after its implementation. Pulling up the Jammu and Kashmir government for its debt situation, the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) has said the state's fiscal liabilities have gone up by 16 percent to Rs 36,267 crore as on March end, 2012.
"The overall fiscal liabilities of J&K State has increased from Rs 31,272 crore at the end of 31st March 2011 to Rs 36,267 crore at the end of 31 March 2012," said the CAG report for 2011-2012 fiscal, tabled in the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly last week. The total liabilities comprise Rs 20,789 crore of internal debt, Rs 1,903 crore as loans and advances from Government of India and Rs 13,575 crore in the form of public account liability as on March 31st, 2012, CAG said.
The fiscal liability GSDP (Gross State Domestic Product) ratio of the state declined from 65.6 percent at the end of 31 March, 2011 to 58.2 percent at the end of 31 March 2012, it said. The fiscal deficit of the state increased from Rs 1,930 crore in 2006-07 to Rs 3,694 crore in 2011-12, while primary deficit rose from Rs 143 crore to Rs 1,311 crore during the same period, it said. The "state's own deficit" also increased from Rs 10,680 crore to Rs 21,730 crore during 2011-12.
The program has fetched Rs 76.45 crore against the cost of Rs 317.41 crore approved on 3.48 lakh kanals of land for grant of ownership to the occupants.
Scores of examples can be cited here to prove the hollowness of the minister's claims. The CAG, for the information of the FM has been crying from rooftops about the failure of the government especially on contributing its share for implementation of the centrally sponsored schemes.
And as far as improvement in tax collection is concerned, the minister must know that it is not an achievement. It reflects the repressive measures of the government. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
