AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
LOCAL FUND AUDIT, PURI, ODISHA
CATEGORY : Sree Jagannath Temple, Puri,General Audit Report No : 45863/AR/2014-2015-PURI
PARA: 1 TITLE SHEET
1 Name of the Institution : Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. 2 Year of Accounts under Audit : 2012-2013 2013-2014 3 Name of the Local Authority during the year of A/Cs : SRI PRADIPTA KUMAR MOHAPATRA, IAS CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR FROM 1.4.2012 TO 13.5.2012 SRI ARABINDA KUMAR PADHI, IAS. CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR FROM 13.5.12 TO 31.03.14 SRI DEVI PRASAD PANDA, ADMINISTRATORDEVELOPMENTFROM 1.4.12 TO 13.5.12 SRI PRASANNA KUMAR HOTA, ADMINISTRATORDEVELOPMENT FROM 13.5.2012 TO 25.07.2013 SRI MAHESWAR AGASTII/C ADMINISTRATORDEVELOPMENT FROM 16.8.13 TO 22.10.2013 SRI MAHESWAR AGASTI ADMINISTRATORDEVELOPMENTFROM 23.10.13 TO 31.3.2013 SRIDEVI PRASAD PANDA ADMINISTRATOR NITI FROM-1.4.12 TO-25.7.13 SRI PRASANNA KUMAR HOTA ,ADMINISTRATOR NITIFROM 26.7.13 TO31.3.14 SRI PRADYUMNA KUMAR TRIPATHY OFS DEPUTY- ADMINISTRATORFINANCEFROM 1.4.12-TO 14.5.2012 SRI BINOD KUMAR PANDA OFS DEPUTY- ADMINISTRATORFINANCEFROM14.5.12 TO-3.10.2012 SRI PURNA CHANDRA JENA, OFS. DEPUTY- ADMINISTRATORFINANCEFROM3.10.12 TO 5.6.2013 SRI TRIPATI NANDA DASH.OFS DEPUTY-ADMINISTRATORFINANCE FROM 5.6.13 TO 31.3.2014 Name of the Local Authority at the time of Audit : SRI ARABINDA KUMAR PADHI, IAS CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR FROM 13.5.14 TO 9.3.2015 SRI BIKASH CHANDRA MOHAPATRA,IAS CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR FROM 28.10.2014 TO9.3.2015 SRISURESH CHANDRA MAHAPATRA,IAS CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR FROM 9.3.15 TO CONTINUING SRI PRASANNA KUMAR HOTA,OAS, ADMINISTRATORNITI FROM 7.5.14 TO 28.2.2015 SRI PRADEEP KUMAR DASH,OAS,NITI28.2.2015 TO CONTINUING SRI MAHESWAR AGASTI OASDEVELOPMENT FROM 7.5.2014 TO 28.2.15 SRI PRASANNA KUMAR HOTA,OAS ADMINISTRATORDEVELOPMENT FROM 28.2.15 TO CONTINUING SRI TRIPATI NANDA DASH, OFS DEPUTY-ADMINISTRATORFINANCE FROM 7.5.2014 TO 30.4.2015 4 Duration of Audit : 07-05-2014 To 12-05-2015 (Mandays Consumed :- 551.75) 5 Name of the Auditors : INDUMATI SAHOO - Lead Auditor(29-12-2014 to 12-05-2015) AMITA SATAPATHY - Lead Auditor(07-05-2014 to 12-05-2015) MANASI PAHI - Lead Auditor(13-11-2014 to 12-05-2015) SUJATA DAS - Auditor(07-05-2014 to 12-05-2015) ANNAPURNA BOIPAI - Auditor(07-05-2014 to 12-05-2015) ADITYA KUMAR PANDA - Auditor(07-05-2014 to 12-05-2015) AR -PURI 02 - Auditor(07-05-2014 to 12-05-2015) SANGHAMITRA BEURA - Auditor(27-12-2014 to 12-05-2015) DEEPAK RANJAN BINAKAR - Auditor(29-12-2014 to 12-05-2015)
6 Name of the Reviewing Officer : Smt Arundhati Jena(District Audit Officer) 7 Date of submission of report by Reviewing officer : 03-07-2015 8 Entry Conference Date : 14-05-2014 9 Exit Conference Date : 01-08-2015
1 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
10 Name of the District Audit Officer : Smt Arundhati Jena 11 Date of approval of report by District Audit Officer : 30-09-2015
2 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
PARA: 2 PHYSICAL VERIFICATION
Slno Name Value Remarks 1 Cashier Money Receipt book nil 2 DCR of Dwaja(Siha)Vol-IIpage Nil I 3 Mangala Alati Receipt Book nil 4 Abakash Receipt Books nil 5 Brahaman Bhojan receiptbooks nil 6 Donation Receipt Books nil 7 Miscellanious receiptbook nil 8 Parmanik ticket nil 9 Sradh purohit nil 10 chanda Dakhina Receipt book nil 11 MadhyanDhupa receipt book nil 12 Heomeopathy user fee Receipt nil Book 13 MahalM.R. nil 14 Sandya Dhupa receipt books nil 15 RTI Rt Book nil 16 M.R. for I(nformation center nil 17 PurohitReceipt Book nil 18 Sradha Receipt Book nil 19 Other Misecenallous receipt nil book 20 Rajabhag pauti Receipt Books nil 21 Elecrical money ReceiptBook nil 22 Postage Stamp Account Vol-I 1303.00 nil pega No-3 23 Liquid Cash Rs 28,683.00After Transaction 24 Date of Physical Verification 07.05.2014 NIL 25 Recorded At CashBook VOlume-I at Page No-124
Comments Non production of records for physical verification (OSP-1&2)
The following records could not be physically verified due to non production to audit at the time of commencement.
1.Stock position of MB
2. Stock position of unused Salable form and Books (Temple publication and other publication)
3.Court Fees
3 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
4 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
PARA: 3 LIST OF VERIFIED RECORDS A : List Of Verified Records/Register Slno List Records/Register
B : List of Records/Registers not Produced to Audit Slno List Records/Register
C : List of Records/Registers not Maintained Slno List Records/Register
Comments LIST OF RECORDS VERIFIED LIST OF RECORDS NOT PRODUCED LIST OF RECORDS NOT MAINTAINED 1. General cash books for the year 2012 – 13 & 2013 – Quarry Lease files Stock Register of Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas 14 2. Bank pass books Sale of coconut A/c Abstract Register of Receipt & Expenditure 3. Cheque Issue Register Orchard A/c Non-Disbursement Register 4. Paid vouchers for 01.04.12 to 31.03.14 (Bank) Certificate Dues 5. Paid vouchers for 01.04.12 to 31.03.14 (Cash) Collection from Bagha & Gopinath Dochhain farms 6. Journal vouchers for 01.04.12 to 31.03.14 Land Revenue Penalty 7. Investment Ledger Mahal collection 8. Investment Files Acquittance Rolls of Pension, Gratuity & un-utilized Leave 9. Advance Ledger Pensions files along with service books 10. Counter foils of Cashier’s Money Receipt Books DCB of electric collection 11. Counter foils of Chanda Dakhina Receipt Books DCB of shop rent 12. Counter foils of Donation & Misc. Receipt Books Files regarding electric rent rate with relevant office order a. Main office donation cell No. of shops to which electric connection is supplied along with agreement b. Lion’s Gate information centre Log Book of D.G. set c. Sakha Karjyalaya Tender & Agreement files of Labour Contractor d. Sea Beach information centre Tender documents of Labour Contractors e. Railway Station information centre Acknowledgement of EPF & ESI deposits by Labour Contractors f. Sri Gundicha Temple information centre Terms & Conditions of Labour Contract g. Information centre at Bhubaneswar Register of courier service 13. Counter foils of Parimanik Collection Ticket Book a. Bhitar katha Darshani ticket b. Mangala Arati c. Abakash d. Sakala Dhupa e. Madhyana Dhupa f. Sandhya Alati g. Sandhya Dhupa h. Chandan Lagi 14. Siha Register of Parimanik Collection 15. Counter foils of misc. receipt books relating to collection of Dhwaja fee 16. Sakha Karjyalaya Siha register 17. Daily collection register of P.R. wings at Lion’s Gate, Sea Beach, Railway Rtation, Gundicha Temple & BBSR Information Centre. 18. Grants & U.C. file 19. Grants Register 20. Stock Register of Receipt books and saleable forms 21. Stock Register of books, journal of C & P Section of all sale counter 22. Pay Acquittance Roll of staff relating to different establishments 23. Service books and Personal files 24. T.A. bills 25. Vehicle Log Book
5 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
26. Draft & Cheque Register 27. Stock register of Gold & Silver 28. Stock register of Silver coins 29. Kothabhoga Stock Register 30. Issue Register of Kothabhoga Materials 31. Sandal Wood stock register 32. Lagi Stock & Issue Register 33. Stamp A/C Register 34. Letter Issue Register 35. Old age Pension files 36. O.A.P. Acquittance Roll 37. Daily Palia Reward Acquittance Roll 38. Pindika Collection Register 39. DCR of Peja Safei & Rosa Chula 40. DCR of shop rent 41. Telephone file 42. Stock Register (Niti) 43. DCR of Electricity charges 44. Handi Kudia stock register 45. Kothabhoga Palia Acquittance Roll 46. Hundi collection register 47. Land sale case records 48. Work case records with M.B.s 49. Nilachal Bhakta & Yatri Niwas A/c 50. Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas A/c for 2013 – 14 51. Rajbhag collection registers 52. Stock register of Misc. Section (Computer, Stationary, Livery, Contingency, Permanent, Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas, Nilachal Bhakta & Yatri Niwas) 53. Stock Register of Medicine
6 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
PARA: 4 FINANCIAL POSITION
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2012-2013
Slno Name of the OB as on Opening Receipt Total(In Expenditur Closing Closing Closing Closing Difference Remarks Cash Book Date Balance(I during the Rs:) e during Balance as Balance(I Balance as Balance(I (In Rs:) n Rs:) Year the Year per Audit n Rs:) per (DD n under under (DD MM (AUDIT) MM Rs:)(CAS Audit(In Audit(In YYYY) YYYY) H BOOK) Rs:) Rs:) Cash Book 1 Main Cash 01-04-2012 3076656 60837069 63913725 60933100 31-03-2013 2980624 31-03-2013 2980624 0.00 Details of head Book 1.79 3.00 4.79 5.00 9.79 9.79 wise receipt and expenditure is uploaded in statement separately. GRAND 3076656 60837069 63913725 60933100 2980624 2980624 0.00 TOTAL 1.79 3.00 4.79 5.00 9.79 9.79
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2013-2014
Slno Name of the OB as on Opening Receipt Total(In Expenditur Closing Closing Closing Closing Difference Remarks Cash Book Date Balance(I during the Rs:) e during Balance as Balance(I Balance as Balance(I (In Rs:) n Rs:) Year the Year per Audit n Rs:) per (DD n under under (DD MM (AUDIT) MM Rs:)(CAS Audit(In Audit(In YYYY) YYYY) H BOOK) Rs:) Rs:) Cash Book 1 Main Cash 01-04-2013 2980624 71175183 74155808 67836721 31-03-2014 6319087 31-03-2014 6319087 0.00 Details of head Book 9.79 8.00 7.79 0.00 7.79 7.79 wise receipt and expenditure is uploaded in statement separately. GRAND 2980624 71175183 74155808 67836721 6319087 6319087 0.00 TOTAL 9.79 8.00 7.79 0.00 7.79 7.79
Comments Since audit of Shree Jagannath Temple Administration Office was not conducted for the year 2011 – 12, Opening Balance as on 01.04.12 is taken as per their cash book by the present audit.
Details of O.B. as on 01.04.12 is given below:
In shape of Cash Rs 4,32,127.31
In Bank Rs 3,03,34,434.48
Total Rs 3,07,66,561.79
Details of C.B. as on 31.03.13 is given below
In shape of Cash Rs 18,84,062.31
In Bank Rs 2,79,22,187.48
Total Rs 2,98,06,249.79
Details of C.B. as on 31.03.14 is given below
In shape of Cash Rs 892926.00
In Bank Rs 62297951.79
7 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Total Rs 63190877.79
Unauthorized retention of heavy cash in hand (OSP 298 - 301)
(A) On verification of the Cash Book in respect of transaction of daily cash from the date of 22.3.13 to 22.4.13, it was observed that a heavy cash of Rs.7,03,060.00 as extracted from the data in following table was retained in hand daily without any verifiable bona fide purpose. The average position of the data following to the table shows that daily collection and expenditure of cash is limited within Rs.500000.00 everyday. As per O.M.No.9482 (265)/F Date 06.03.2000 and O.M.No.33374/F dt .01.06.2001 of Finance Deptt. Govt. of Odisha, parking of public money outside i.e. in shape of cash, DCRs, Drafts and Banker’s cheque is banned and considered to be an irregular practice.The local authority was notified of the loss of Rs. 2344 per month and Rs. 28122.00 per annum (by interest amount in a savings account @4%p.a. rate) that was borne because of the retention of an average amount of Rs.703060.00 of cash in hand for a month together. The local authority hasn't yielded any response to the objection memo stating this loss of Rs 28122.00 that occurred because of their retention of cash in hand. Therefore, the accountant and Deputy Administrator (Finance) are responsible for this loss and Rs 28122 is to be recovered from them.
Cash transaction from 22.3.2013 to 22.4.2013 Dt. O.B. Receipt Total Expr. C.B. 22.3.13 528034.31 191929 719963.31 494887 225076.31 23.3.13 225076.31 193497 418573.31 22791 395782.31 25.3.13 395782.31 568078 963860.31 577506 386354.31 26.3.13 386354.31 364343 750697.31 271374 479323.31 30.3.13 479323.31 741126 1220449.31 193678 1026771.31 31.3.13 1026771.31 1067238 2094009.31 209947 1884062.31 2.4.13 1884062.31 314687 2198749.31 0 2198749.31 3.4.13 2198749.31 486577 2685326.31 1631167 1054159.31 4.4.13 1054159.31 539519 1593678.31 850000 743678.31 5.4.13 743678.31 292771 1036449.31 103274 933175.31 6.4.13 933175.31 289679 1222854.31 749766 473088.31 8.4.13 473088.31 2724263 3197351.31 2282186 915165.31 9.4.13 915165.31 324378 1239543.31 883995 355548.31 10.4.13 355548.31 193701 549249.31 43671 505578.31 11.4.13 505578.31 299422 805000.31 29095 775905.31 12.4.13 775905.31 150962 926867.31 614804 312063.31 15.4.13 312063.31 295121 607184.31 188418 418766.31 16.4.13 418766.31 161765 580531.31 94190 486341.31 17.4.13 486341.31 326511 812852.31 395623 417229.31 18.4.13 467229.31 111228 578457.31 97193 481264.31 20.4.13 481264.31 335694 816958.31 124702 692256.31 22.4.13 692256.31 395630 1087886.31 780903 306983.31 Total 15738372.8 10368119 26106491.82 10639170 15467321.82 Average Transaction calculated as per the above table:-
O.B. Rs.7,15,381.00
Receipt Rs. 47,1278.00
Total Rs.11,86,659.00
Expr. Rs.4,83,599.00
C.B. Rs.7,03,060.00
The closing balance of 31.3.2014 as detailed below shows that a huge cash balance of Rs 892926.00 is retained in double lock arrangement, which was also contravening the codal provision.
O.B. as on 31.3.2014 Rs.575665.31
8 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Cash Receipt Rs.1273474.00 Total Rs.1849129.31 Expenditure Rs.956203.31 Closing Balance Rs.892926.00 (B) The fidelity guarantee insured from the Accountant and Cashier is not to the par of the retention of cash in hand.When the cash transaction in single unit crossed the money value amounting to Rs.1000000.00 daily, the fidelity guarantee assured from the Cashier and the Accountant were only for Rs. 50000.00 and Rs. 300000.00 respectively during 2010 to 2013 as detailed in table-1. Further, from the Office Sanction Order No.187 dated .6.1.14 for payment to M/S New India Assurance Company Ltd., Puri Branch,it is noticed that the money in transit for a single transit limit is ensured Rs.1500000.00, the amount of fidelity guarantee is remained same as in the previous years as detailed in table-ii. How the authorities can assure that the heavy amount of cash retained in hand of the Cashier/ Accountant would not be misutilised.
Table-1
Policy No. Covering Sum insured Description Premium including period Service Tax Particulas of Insurance policies 163701/46/10/7800000060 Fidelity 50000.00 Cashier 5793.00 guarantee 300000.00 Accountant From 30.7.10 to29.7.13 163701/48/10/7600000054 2010-11 to Money in transit 1000000.00 Single Transit Limit 12657.00 2012-13 30000000.00 Total turn over Table-ii
Sum insured Description Premium including Service Tax
Particulars of Insurance policies Fidelity guarantee 50000.00 Cashier 1802.00 300000.00 Accountant Money in transit 1500000.00 Single Transit Limit 6068.00 45000000.00 Total turn over (C) From the sanction orders for payment to the Insurance Companies towards premiums of policies, it is noticed that the premium amount towards the fidelity guarantee are paid from the temple fund and not from the personal accounts of the Cashier and the Accountant, who handle the heavy cash daily.The local authority is requested to put forth a suitable explanation supporting such payment.
(D) The collection and deposit position of the dt.s as stated following may be perused.
Dt. O.B. Receipt Total Expr. C.B. 30.3.13 479323.31 741126 1220449.31 193678 1026771.31 31.3.13 1026771.31 1067238 2094009.31 209947 1884062.31 02.4.13 1884062.31 314687 2198749.31 0 2198749.31 03.4.13 2198749.31 486577 2685326.31 1631167 1054159.31 As per codal provision, the collection of the day should be deposited in the same day or the next transaction day. But in the above cases Rs.1884062.00 has been retained in hand without any deposits of the same for two days, as a result of which the cash balance came to Rs.2198749.00 on 2.4.13.The temple authority is requested to avoid such unsafe practices henceforth and instruct the Cashier and Accountant accordingly.
9 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
PARA: 5 DETAILS OF CLOSING BALANCE AS PER BANK PASS BOOKS & CASH BOOK BANK BALANCE FIGURE
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2012-2013
Slno Name of the Bank A/C No. Closing Closing Closing Closing Difference(In Remarks Balance Date Balance in Pass Balance in Balance in Rs:)(A-B) As on Book(In Rs:) (A) Bank Date Bank as (dd/mm/yyyy) Cash Book mentioned in (dd/mm/yyyy) Cash Book(In Rs:) (B) 1 Central Bank of India 3173668300 31-03-2013 3931812.00 31-03-2013 3931812.00 0.00 2 SBI Main Branch 10913111382 31-03-2013 1851352.43 31-03-2013 1851352.43 0.00 3 UCO Bank 029001000011 31-03-2013 227903.18 31-03-2013 7738781.18 -7510878.00 Difference amount is 73 reconciled below in the comment box. 4 SBI Temple Branch 10203852724 31-03-2013 21890.50 31-03-2013 21890.50 0.00 5 UCO Bank 206201000000 31-03-2013 8073726.87 31-03-2013 8319426.87 -245700.00 Difference amount is 01 reconciled below in the comment box. 6 United Bank Of India 024101005190 31-03-2013 8453.42 31-03-2013 8453.42 0.00 0 7 Vijaya Bank 740701011001 31-03-2013 4539886.00 31-03-2013 4539886.00 0.00 353 8 Axis Bank, Puri 464010100014 31-03-2013 16357.13 31-03-2013 16357.13 0.00 368 9 HDFC Bank Ltd, 122177000001 31-03-2013 13670.37 31-03-2013 13670.37 0.00 BBSR 8 10 Allahabad Bank 1190 20273147056 31-03-2013 6210.98 31-03-2013 6210.98 0.00 11 SBI 30035746068 31-03-2013 5152.07 31-03-2013 5152.07 0.00 12 UCO Bank Temple 206201000014 31-03-2013 190760.72 31-03-2013 598293.72 -407533.00 Difference amount is Branch 40 reconciled below in the comment box. 13 IDBI 042104000170 31-03-2013 6353.54 31-03-2013 6353.54 0.00 345 14 Andhra Bank, Puri 045810011000 31-03-2013 5224.04 31-03-2013 5224.04 0.00 346 15 Bank of Baroda 242901000002 31-03-2013 68066.00 31-03-2013 68655.00 -589.00 Difference amount is 05 reconciled below in the comment box. 16 SBI 30362202026 31-03-2013 197516.79 31-03-2013 198942.79 -1426.00 Difference amount is reconciled below in the comment box. 17 Bank of India 555210100000 31-03-2013 28928.79 31-03-2013 28928.79 0.00 001 18 Bank of India 511210110001 31-03-2013 39345.84 31-03-2013 39345.84 0.00 111 19 Puri Gramya Bank 011001000002 31-03-2013 22360.00 31-03-2013 22360.00 0.00 061 20 SBI, General 10203852316 31-03-2013 228312.25 31-03-2013 228312.25 0.00 donation 21 SBI (Foreign 10913110956 31-03-2013 26634.97 31-03-2013 26634.97 0.00 Exchange) 22 Syndicate Bank 800022000005 31-03-2013 12143.84 31-03-2013 12143.84 0.00 44 23 Union Bank of India 394402010000 31-03-2013 9061.76 31-03-2013 9061.76 0.00 467 24 Camara Bank 143910101702 31-03-2013 2447.00 31-03-2013 2447.00 0.00 6 25 Andhra Bank (Jatani) 080110011000 31-03-2013 217002.00 31-03-2013 217002.00 0.00 309 26 Punjab National Bank 322400010006 31-03-2013 6916.00 31-03-2013 6916.00 0.00 9861
10 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
GRAND TOTAL 19757488.49 27923614.49 -8166126.00
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2013-2014
Slno Name of the Bank A/C No. Closing Closing Closing Closing Difference(In Remarks Balance Date Balance in Pass Balance in Balance in Rs:)(A-B) As on Book(In Rs:) (A) Bank Date Bank as (dd/mm/yyyy) Cash Book mentioned in (dd/mm/yyyy) Cash Book(In Rs:) (B) 27 Allahabad Bank 20273147056 31-03-2014 61400.98 31-03-2014 61400.98 0.00 28 Andhra Bank (Jatni) 080110011000 31-03-2014 997123.00 31-03-2014 997123.00 0.00 309 29 Canara Bank 143910101702 31-03-2014 3382.00 31-03-2014 3382.00 0.00 6 30 Central Bank of India 3173668300 31-03-2014 4922.00 31-03-2014 4922.00 0.00 31 State Bank of India 10913111382 31-03-2014 2090452.00 31-03-2014 2090452.00 0.00 (Main Branch) 32 State Bank of India 10203852724 31-03-2014 93369.50 31-03-2014 93369.50 0.00 (Temple Branch) 33 Union Bank of India 394402010053 31-03-2014 120478.50 31-03-2014 120478.50 0.00 218 34 Union Bank of India 394402010053 31-03-2014 712676.50 31-03-2014 612676.50 100000.00 The difference 219 amount of Rs100000.00 is credited in the bank account on 17.02.14 but not taken in the cash book. 35 UCO Bank 029001000011 31-03-2014 55706082.76 31-03-2014 52158719.76 3547363.00 Difference amount is 73 reconciled below in the comment box. 36 United Bank of India 024101005190 31-03-2014 123538.42 31-03-2014 123538.42 0.00 0 37 Vijaya Bank 740701011001 31-03-2014 784490.00 31-03-2014 784490.00 0.00 353 38 Axis Bank, Puri 464010100014 31-03-2014 9571.00 31-03-2014 9571.00 0.00 368 39 HDFC Bank Ltd., 012217700000 31-03-2014 55558.57 31-03-2014 55558.57 0.00 BBSR 18 40 Punjab National Bank 322400010006 31-03-2014 5826.00 31-03-2014 5826.00 0.00 9861 41 State Bank of India 30362202026 31-03-2014 14347.05 31-03-2014 14347.05 0.00 (Internet Banking) 42 State Bank of India 30035746068 31-03-2014 1216043.80 31-03-2014 1216043.80 0.00 (ATM) 43 UCO Bank (Temple 206201000014 31-03-2014 32253.72 31-03-2014 444671.72 -412418.00 Difference amount is Branch) 40 reconciled below in the comment box. 44 IDBI Bank 042104000170 31-03-2014 8908.54 31-03-2014 8908.54 0.00 345 45 Bank of Baroda 242901000002 31-03-2014 1235965.00 31-03-2014 1235965.00 0.00 05 46 Bank of India 555210100000 31-03-2014 50107.79 31-03-2014 50107.79 0.00 001 47 Bank of India 511210110001 31-03-2014 60360.85 31-03-2014 60360.85 0.00 11 48 Odisha Gramya Bank 011001000002 31-03-2014 54212.00 31-03-2014 54212.00 0.00 061 49 State Bank of India 10203852316 31-03-2014 332393.25 31-03-2014 332393.25 0.00 (Evening Branch) 50 State Bank of India 10913110956 31-03-2014 103035.97 31-03-2014 103035.97 0.00 (Foreign Exchange) 51 Syndicate Bank 800022000005 31-03-2014 19552.85 31-03-2014 19562.85 -10.00 Difference amount is
11 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
44 reconciled below in the comment box. 52 Union Bank of India 394402010000 31-03-2014 55676.76 31-03-2014 55676.76 0.00 467 53 Yes Bank 025294600000 31-03-2014 16587.23 31-03-2014 16587.23 0.00 023 54 Andhra Bank, Puri 045810011000 31-03-2014 6395.04 31-03-2014 6395.04 0.00 346 55 UCO Bank (Temple 206201000000 31-03-2014 1599945.93 31-03-2014 1558175.93 41770.00 Difference amount is Branch) 01 reconciled below in the comment box GRAND TOTAL 65574657.01 62297952.01 3276705.00
Reconciliation RECONCILIATION OF BANK STATEMENT AS PER CASH BOOK FOR THE YEAR 2012 - 13
1. Bank of Baroda, A/c No. 24290100000205
Closing balance as per pass book as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 68066.00
Add Bank charges deducted by bank on 29.03.2013 but not shown in cash book Rs. 533.00
Add bank charges deducted by bank on 30.03.2013 but not shown in cash book Rs. 56.00
______
Total Rs. 68655.00
Closing balance as per cash book as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 68655.00
2. SBI, A/c No. 30362202026
Closing balance as per pass book as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 197516.79
Add interest received from corpus fund which is taken as receipt vide
M.R. no. 7180 dtd 31.03.2013 and the same amount again taken as general donation vide M.R. no. 7185 dtd 31.03.2013 Rs. 1426.00
______
Total Rs. 198942.79
Closing balance as per cash book as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 198942.79
3. UCO Bank (Temple Branch), A/c No. 20620100001440
Closing balance as per pass book as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 190760.72
Add foundation fund (90%) collection of 30.03.13 & 31.03.13 deposited in bank but credited in pass book on 02.04.13 Rs.407533.00
______
Total Rs. 598293.72
Closing balance as per cash book as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 598293.72
4. UCO Bank (Temple Branch), A/c No. 20620100000001
Closing balance as per pass book as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 8073726.87
Add cheque deposited in bank on 30.03.13 but credited in pass book on 08.04.13 Rs.100000.00
Add donation box collection amount deposited in bank on 31.03.13 but credited
12 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
in pass book on 02.04.13 Rs. 100419.00
Add foundation fund (10%) collection of 30.03.13 & 31.03.13 deposited in bank but credited in pass book on 02.04.13 Rs.45281.00
______
Total Rs. 8319426.87
Closing balance as per cash book as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 8319426.87
5. UCO Bank (Temple Branch), A/c No. 02900100001173
Closing balance as per pass book as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 227903.18
(+) Closing balanace of UCO Flexi Fix Deposit as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 9000000.00
Add cheques deposited in bank but encashed after 31.03.13 (details given below) Rs.207111.00
Deduct cheques issued but encashed after 31.03.13 (details given below) Rs. 1696233.00
______
Total Rs. 7738781.18
Closing balance as per cash book as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 7738781.18
LIST OF CHEQUES ISSUED BUT ENCASHED AFTER 31.03.2013
CHEQUE NO. DATE OF ISSUE AMOUNT DATE OF ENCASHMENT
237920 06.10.12 22000Not encashed by 31.03.2014
211922 21.12.12 20000The cheque is not encashed and is taken as receipt vide MR no. 2803 dated 22.08.2013 035820 02.02.13 3609 12.04.13
036359 07.03.13 1119 11.04.13
036369 12.03.13 49250 08.04.13
036394 22.03.13 136698 03.04.13
036392 23.03.13 30000 05.04.13
036391 23.03.13 13583 04.04.14
036395 26.03.13 43909 08.04.13
750050 31.03.13 423720 05.04.13
750051 31.03.13 419900 05.04.14
750047 30.03.13 181800 13.04.13
750045 31.03.13 345540 04.04.13
750046 30.03.13 5105 08.04.13
TOTAL 1696233
13 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
LIST OF CHEQUES DEPOSITED BUT ENCASHED AFTER 31.03.2013
CHEQUE NO. DATE OF DEPOSIT AMOUNT DATE OF ENCASHMENT
529348 30.03.13 111 04.04.13
028923 30.03.13 100000 03.04.13
359779 30.03.13 100000 03.04.13
805313 31.03.13 500 04.04.13
020436 31.03.13 500 23.04.13
046800 31.03.13 6000 11.04.13
TOTAL 207111
RECONCILIATION OF BANK STATEMENT AS PER CASH BOOK FOR THE YEAR 2013 - 14
1. Union Bank of India A/c No. 394402010053219
Closing balance as per pass book as on 31.03.2014 Rs. 612676.50
Add amount credited in the bank A/c on 17.02.14 but not taken Rs. 100000.00 in cash book
Total Rs. 712676.50
Closing balance as per cash book as on 31.03.2014 Rs. 712676.50
N.B. – However as per the local authority Rs. 100000.00 which is credited in the bank A/c on 17.02.14 has been refunded to the person concerned as per his request vide Vr. No. 170 dtd 28.05.14 by cheque no. 761221 dtd 28.05.14 as per O/o No. 5115 dtd 05.04.14
2. UCO Bank A/c No. 02900100001173
Closing balance as per pass book as on 31.03.2014 Rs. 16706082.76
(+) Closing balance of UCO Flexi Fix Deposit as on 31.03.14 Rs. 39000000.00
Add cheques deposited in bank but encashed after 31.03.14 Rs. 5752.00
(Details given below)
Deduct cheques issued but encashed after 31.03.14 Rs. 3553115.00
(Details given below)
Total Rs. 52158719.76
Closing balance as per cash book as on 31.03.2014 Rs. 52158719.76
LIST OF CHEQUES ISSUED BUT ENCASHED AFTER 31.03.2014 CHEQUE NO. DATE OF ISSUE AMOUNT DATE OF ENCASHMENT
237920 06.10.12 22000Not encashed by 31.03.2014 758018 24.12.13 30500 759162 15.03.14 1308066 08.04.14 759173 21.03.14 19200 02.05.14
14 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
760317 29.03.14 1220183 02.04.14 760316 29.03.14 425284 02.04.14 760325 31.03.14 27699 04.04.14 760322 31.03.14 84232 04.04.14 760323 31.03.14 395951 07.04.14 760324 31.03.14 20000 07.05.14 TOTAL 3553115
LIST OF CHEQUES DEPOSITED BUT ENCASHED AFTER 31.03.2014 CHEQUE NO. DATE OF DEPOSIT AMOUNT DATE OF ENCASHMENT
505643 19.03.14 500 585124 31.03.14 4252 02.04.14 783827 29.03.14 500 02.04.14 042477 29.03.14 500 02.04.14 TOTAL 5752 3. UCO Bank (Temple Branch), A/c No. 20620100001440
Closing balance as per pass book as on 31.03.2014 Rs. 32253.72
Add foundation fund (90%) collection of 31.03.14 deposited Rs. 412418.00 in bank but credited in pass book on 02.04.14
Total Rs. 444671.72
Closing balance as per cash book as on 31.03.2014 Rs. 444671.72
4. UCO Bank (Temple Branch), A/c No. 20620100000001
Closing balance as per pass book as on 31.03.2014 Rs. 1599945.93
Add foundation fund (10%) collection of 31.03.14 deposited Rs. 45824.00 in bank but credited in pass book on 02.04.14
Deduct cheque issued but encashed after 31.03.14 Rs. 87594.00
(Details given below)
Total Rs. 1558175.93
Closing balance as per cash book as on 31.03.2014 Rs. 1558175.93
LIST OF CHEQUES ISSUED BUT ENCASHED AFTER 31.03.2014 CHEQUE NO. DATE OF ISSUE AMOUNT DATE OF ENCASHMENT
779361 27.03.14 31481 03.04.14 779358 28.03.14 13971 03.04.14 779373 31.03.14 42142 03.04.14 TOTAL 87594 5. Syndicate Bank A/c No. 80002200000544
Closing balance as per pass book as on 31.03.2014 Rs. 19552.85
Add amount credited in excess in the cash book on account of Rs. 10.00
15 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
interest credited on 31.03.14
Total Rs. 19562.85
Closing balance as per cash book as on 31.03.2014 Rs. 19562.85
N.B. – However as per the local authority excess Rs. 10.00 which is credited in the cash book has been adjusted from the total donation collection of April’ 14 and May' 14 vide M.R. No. 1419 dtd 11.06.14
16 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
PARA: 6 STOCK POSITION
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2012-2013
Slno Material/ Item Opening Receipt Issued Closing As per stock Remarks Balance Balance As per register Audit 1 Gold 10459.728 971.06 301.258 11129.53 11129.53 2 Silver 78665.014 14296.54 8234.72 84726.83 84726.834 3 Munda Tanka 39 47 0 86.00 47 4 Chira Tanka 73 4 0 77.00 77 5 Adhuli 6 1 0 7.00 7
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2013-2014
Slno Material/ Item Opening Receipt Issued Closing As per stock Remarks Balance Balance As per register Audit 6 Gold 11129.53 932.08 161.528 11900.08 11900.082 7 Silver 84726.834 6631.39 449.4 90908.82 90694.594 the difference of 214.226g of silver is less shown in stock register due to balancing mistake. 8 Munda Tanka 86 63 0 149.00 149 9 Chira Tanka 77 6 0 83.00 83 10 Adhuli 7 1 0 8.00 8
Comments 1. Stock Position of Gold & Silver
While checking the Donation Receipt Books of donation received through donation boxes, donation cell and Hundi collection, it has come to notice that besides cash,coins and Gold and Silver ornaments, old Silver coins have been received by the Temple Administration. Hence,the d stock position (till date) and year wise break-up of such items has been asked through audit objection memo no. 63 dtd 22.12.14. In response to the memo the local authority has not furnished any data.
Hence less shown in silver stock of 214.226g in the stock register as on 31.03.14 is treated as a loss to the institution and hence Rs 7498.00 @ Rs 35.00 per gram is suggested for recovery from Sri Radhanath Pratihari, Nazir and Sri Tripati Nanda Dash, Dy. Administrator, finance.
2. Non maintenance of stock register as per rule (OSP 204)
While checking the bank voucher w.r.t. connected records and stock register of Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas for the year 2013 – 14 it was noticed that different items were purchased (durable items) for use at Gundicha Bhakta Niwas for Rs 13640746.00 as furnished in detailed below. Stock entry certificate has been given on the face of the voucher with page reference of stock register. When stock register was checked, it was found that only a copy of purchase bill was pasted on the referral page. But no stock register has been maintained against the purchase of these items which is in violation of rule 118 of Vol I and form no. 7 of OGFR Vol II.
As per Rule No. 111 of OGFR Vol I half yearly physical verification should be made by the authority or the person authorized by him. But in this case the so called stock register as maintained by the local authority (gen. misc. section) which is produced to audit, in which no certificate of physical verification was found. In the above circumstances, it is not possible on the part of audit to ascertain the actual stock position of Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas. Hence the local authority was requested to maintain the stock register as per rule and prescribed pro-forma and produce the same to audit vide audit objection memo no. 108 dtd 02.04.15. In response to the audit objection memo the local authority replied, "Noted please" which does not comply the objection. Hence the entire amount of Rs 1,36,40,746.00 is kept under objection till production of stock register as per rule quoted above.
Vr. No. Date Amount To whom paid Particulars 329 29/06/13 34723504S Interior, BBSR Furniture 668 23/09/13 29677944S Interior, BBSR Furniture 334 1/7/2013 675700B K Infotech, BBSR 24 Nos of Sony LED TV Model KLV-32, EX-330 & 1 no. Sony LED TV model no. 40EX-430
391 11/7/2013 881280Raj Electricals, BBSR 48 Samsung LED TV (+ 1 free) 399 15/7/13 845620Odisha Stevedores Pvt. Ltd. Bed sheet, Pillow Cover, Bath towel etc.
17 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
400 15/7/13 121595Bhanja Prabha, BBSR Plastic material for toilet
498 16/8/13 88190Bhanja Prabha, BBSR Plastic material for toilet
485 13/8/13 71043Creative Associates Supply of door and window screen with aluminium rod
994 13/12/13 95004Creative Associates Supply of door and window screen with aluminium rod
506 17.8.13 261750B.K.Infotech 75Nos of TATA SKY connection 518 21.8.13 45082Kripa,B.B.S.R Glow sign board with stand 529 22.8.13 120651Grand furniture Big & small Ladder(25p) 541 27.8.13 697728Aerocom Pvt Ltd supply of metresses 622 4.9.13 2207900AARBI Combines Cumin made 250 KVA D.G.Set 673 25.9.13 200000M/S Shreya Enterprises 5 Nos of Aquaguard cooler
793 25.10.13 306450SHAKTI Electronics PVT LTD 24 Nos of1.5ton AC &24Nos of 2 ton AC with stabiliser
796 26.10.13 193957Continental Tele services Supply of Accord digital EPABX & Accessories,87 Nos of push button telephone set
978 6.12.13 133450Sarojini traders 24 Nos of15 ltr &1No of 25 ltr Geyser 1188 20.2.2014 117999Aerocom Pvt Ltd supply of matresses 100 Nos & 60 Nos of pillow
1194 20.2.14 137203Odisha Stevedores Pvt. Ltd. Supply of bedsheet &pillow cover
TOTAL 13640746 I
18 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
PARA: 7 INVESTMENT
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2012-2013
Slno Opening Opening Amount Total(In Rs:) Amount Closing Closing Closing Closing Difference(I Remarks Balance of Balance(In Encashed Invested Balance as Balance Balance as Balance n Rs:) Investment Rs:) during the during the per (DD Audit(In per (DD Investment as on (DD Year under Year under MM Rs:) MM Ledger(In MM YYYY) Audit(In Audit(In YYYY) YYYY) Rs:) Rs:) Rs:) Audit Investment Ledger 1 01-04-2012 202687573 496169956 1530705780 864525852 31-03-2013 239523163 31-03-2013 239523163 0.00 6.00 .00 .00 .84 2.84 2.84 GRAND 202687573 496169956 1530705780 864525852 239523163 239523163 0.00 TOTAL 6.00 .00 .00 .84 2.84 2.84
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2013-2014
Slno Opening Opening Amount Total(In Rs:) Amount Closing Closing Closing Closing Difference(I Remarks Balance of Balance(In Encashed Invested Balance as Balance Balance as Balance n Rs:) Investment Rs:) during the during the per (DD Audit(In per (DD Investment as on (DD Year under Year under MM Rs:) MM Ledger(In MM YYYY) Audit(In Audit(In YYYY) YYYY) Rs:) Rs:) Rs:) Audit Investment Ledger 2 01-04-2013 239523163 247192988 -76698251.6 285866973 31-03-2014 278197148 31-03-2014 278197148 0.00 2.84 4.49 5 2.65 1.00 1.00 GRAND 239523163 247192988 -76698251.6 285866973 278197148 278197148 0.00 TOTAL 2.84 4.49 5 2.65 1.00 1.00
DETAILS OF CB ON INVESTMENT & Comments :
Details of Investment as on 31.3.2013 is furnished below: A CORPUS FUND
SL NO BANK NAME ACCOUNT NO DATE OF DATE OF TDR AMOUNT RATE OF YEAR / DEPOSIT MATURITY INTEREST DAYS
1SAHARA 3836419141102.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35% 1 INDIA PARIW AR
2SAHARA 3836419141002.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35% 1 INDIA PARIW AR
3SAHARA 3836419140902.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35% 1 INDIA PARIW AR
4SAHARA 3836394009002.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35% 1 INDIA PARIW AR
5SAHARA 3836394008902.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35% 1 INDIA PARIW AR
6SAHARA 3836394008802.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35% 1 INDIA PARIW AR
7UNIT TRUST 2029501200000628.02.95 20 74 000 6.50% 1
19 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
OF INDIA
8UCO BANK 290031003060821.03.11 21.03.14 18 00 00 000 10.17% 1
9UCO BANK 290031003061522.03.11 22.03.14 5 00 00 000 10.17% 1
10UCO BANK 290031003066023.03.11 23.03.14 5 00 00 000 10.17% 1
11UCO BANK 290031003072125.03.11 25.03.14 5 30 00 000 10.17% 1
12UCO BANK 290031003079026.03.11 26.03.14 2 00 00 000 10.17% 1
13UCO BANK 290031003080628.03.11 28.03.14 42 00 00 000 10.17% 1
14UCO BANK 290031003086829.03.11 29.03.14 36 00 00 000 10.17% 1
15UCO BANK 290031003101830.03.11 30.03.14 11 20 00 000 10.17% 1
16UCO BANK 290031003102531.03.11 31.03.14 8 00 00 000 10.17% 1
17UCO BANK 290031003107031.03.11 31.03.14 12 00 00 000 10.17% 1
18CANARA BA 143930300033426.03.13 26.03.14 9 50 00 000 9.76% 1 NK 19CENTRAL 317354058330.03.12 30.03.14 7 00 00 000 11.15% 1 BANK OF INDIA
20CENTRAL 317368112731.03.12 31.03.14 7 00 00 000 11.15% 1 BANK OF INDIA
21YES BANK 2524010000005030.03.13 30.03.14 2 00 00 000 9.80% 1
22VIJAYA BAN 74070210100002814.07.12 27.03.14 4 75 00 000 9.50% K 23VIJAYA BAN 74070210100002914.07.12 27.03.14 4 75 00 000 9.50% K 24VIJAYA BAN 74070210100003014.07.12 27.03.14 4 75 00 000 9.50% K 25VIJAYA BAN 74070210100003114.07.12 27.03.14 4 75 00 000 9.50% K 26BANK 2429030000317230.03.13 30.03.14 21 60 00 000 9.72% 1 OF BARODA
27IDBI BANK, P 40310600001530327.11.12 26.03.14 17 80 000 9.00% URI TOTAL 210 99 14 000
A1 ATM FIXED DEPOSIT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 1HDFC BANK, 11170447000403225.03.11 13.04.13 10 00 000 9.25% 1 PURI 2HDFC BANK, 1117447000548502.11.11 18.11.13 3 00 000 9.25% 1 PURI 3IDBI BANK, P 40310700000147205.02.11 09.02.14 2 00 000 9.25% 1 URI
20 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
4STATE BANK 3177776163107.06.11 03.03.14 2 50 000 9.25% 1 OF INDIA (MAIN BRANCH)
5IDBI BANK, P 40310600001518119.11.12 26.03.14 1 14 000 9.00%16M 7 DAYS URI 6HDFC BANK, 1117447000801506.03.13 27.03.14 5 56 053 8.75%12 M 21 PURI DAYS 7STATE BANK 3291526094130.03.13 30.03.14 12 04 637 8.75% 1 OF INDIA (TEMPLE BRANCH)
8BANK OF 51125611000141528.11.13 26.03.15 9 00 000 9.05%15 m 26 d INDIA, BBSR
9STATE BANK 3267136674722.11.12 26.03.14 4 38 000 8.50%489 DAYS OF INDIA (TEMPLE BRANCH)
10STATE BANK 3267135771122.11.12 26.03.14 2 23 000 8.50%489 DAYS OF INDIA (TEMPLE BRANCH)
11PUNJAB 322400DP0000193824.11.12 26.03.14 1 50 795 8.75%487 DAYS NATIONAL BANK
12STATE BANK 3266859222821.11.12 26.03.14 3 98 038 8.50% 1 OF INDIA (MAIN BRANCH)
13AXIS BANK 91304001275483507.03.13 27.03.14 17 74 122 8.50%385 DAYS
14HDFC BANK, 1117447000748022.11.12 27.03.14 3 22 488 8.75%16M 5 DAYS PURI TOTAL 78 31 133
B INVESTMENT OF FOUNDATION FUND SL NO BANK NAME ACCOUNT NO DATE OF DATE OF TDR AMOUNT RATE OF YEAR DEPOSIT MATURITY INTEREST
1UCO BANK 372897/344/0630.03.07 28.01.14 4 45 72 500 9.75% 1
2UCO BANK 2062031002809421.03.11 21.03.14 1 00 00 000 10.17% 1
3UCO BANK 2062031002812422.03.11 22.03.14 4 20 00 000 10.17% 1
4UCO BANK 2062031002824725.03.11 25.03.14 2 50 00 000 10.17% 1
21 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
5UCO BANK 2062031002828526.03.11 26.03.14 50 00 000 10.17% 1
6UCO BANK 2062031002830828.03.11 28.03.14 6 00 00 000 10.17% 1
7UCO BANK 2062031002847631.03.11 31.03.14 5 00 000 10.17% 1
8UCO BANK 2062031002920606.05.11 23.03.14 32 60 000 8.75% 1
9UCO BANK 2062031002967101.06.11 01.06.13 31 60 000 9.25% 1
10UCO BANK 2062031003029501.07.11 01.07.13 23 20 000 9.25% 1
11UCO BANK 2062031003110001.08.11 01.08.13 28 00 000 9.25% 1
12UCO BANK 2062031003169806.09.11 06.09.13 33 75 000 9.50% 1
13UCO BANK 2062031003251010.10.11 10.10.13 30 60 000 9.50% 1
14UCO BANK 2062031003319708.11.11 08.11.13 34 65 000 9.50% 1
15UCO BANK 2062031003359302.12.11 02.12.13 35 00 000 9.50% 1
16UCO BANK 2062031003427902.01.12 02.01.14 41 10 000 9.50% 1
17UCO BANK 2062031003503002.02.12 02.02.14 39 50 000 9.50% 1
18UCO BANK 2062031003553502.03.12 02.03.14 34 00 000 9.50% 1
19UCO BANK 2062031003596231.03.12 31.03.14 37 50 000 9.50% 1
20UCO BANK 2062031003652509.05.12 09.05.13 53 80 000 9.10% 1
21UCO BANK 2062031003757718.07.12 18.07.13 75 94 000 9.10% 1
22UCO BANK 2062031003801716.08.12 16.08.13 30 82 000 9.10% 1
23UCO BANK 2062031003818505.09.12 05.09.13 48 28 000 9.10% 1
24UCO BANK 2062031003877208.10.12 08.10.13 43 80 000 9.10% 1
25BANK 2429030000317230.03.13 30.03.14 2 50 00 000 9.72% 1 OF BARODA
TOTAL 27 74 86 500
GRAND 239 52 31 633 TOTAL
Details of investment as on 31.3.2014 A FIXED DEPOSIT (CORPUS FUND) 1SAHARA 3836419141102.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35% INDIA PARIW AR
2SAHARA 3836419141002.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35%
22 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
INDIA PARIW AR
3SAHARA 3836419140902.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35% INDIA PARIW AR
4SAHARA 3836394009002.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35% INDIA PARIW AR
5SAHARA 3836394008902.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35% INDIA PARIW AR
6SAHARA 3836394008802.12.02 02.06.14 10 000 10.35% INDIA PARIW AR
7UNIT TRUST 20295012000000628.02.95 20 74 000 6.50% OF INDIA
8VIJAYA BAN 74070366100000130.05.13 30.05.14 3 30 00 000 9.10% K 9ALLAHABAD 74070366100000131.07.13 31.07.14 14 00 00 000 9.30% BANK 10UCO BANK 290031005121412.11.13 12.11.14 3 50 00 000 9.15%
11UCO BANK 290031005120712.11.13 12.11.14 3 00 00 000 9.15%
12BANK OF 55525051000000121.03.14 21.03.15 19 00 00 000 10.00% INDIA 13BANK OF 55525051000000222.03.14 22.03.15 5 80 00 000 10.00% INDIA 14ODISHA GRA 41140000424.03.14 24.03.15 5 00 00 000 9.90% MYA BANK
15BANK OF 55525051000000325.03.14 25.03.15 7 00 00 000 10.00% INDIA 16BANK OF 55525051000000426.03.14 26.03.15 6 19 86 000 10.00% INDIA 17BANK 2429030000354603.01.14 26.03.15 3 50 00 000 9.10% OF BARODA
18BANK OF 55525051000000527.03.14 27.03.15 19 82 25 878 10.00% INDIA 19BANK 2429030000369028.03.14 28.03.15 44 00 00 000 10.00% OF BARODA
20BANK OF 55525051000000629.03.14 29.03.15 10 00 00 000 10.00% INDIA 21BANK 2429030000369229.03.14 29.03.15 25 00 00 000 10.00% OF BARODA
22BANK 2429030000369531.03.14 31.03.15 25 00 00 000 10.00% OF BARODA
23BANK OF 55524371000016531.03.14 31.03.15 39 96 00 000 10.00% INDIA
23 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
24ALLAHABAD 5019807900626.03.14 31.03.15 5 00 00 000 10.00% BANK 25YES BANK 2524010000011431.03.14 31.03.15 5 00 00 000 9.90%
TOTAL 244 29 45 878 A1 FIXED DEPOSIT (ATM / ONLINE) 1HDFC BANK, 5030002182721020.11.13 26.03.15 6 00 162 8.75% PURI 2STATE BANK 3036220202625.11.13 26.03.15 5 71 000 9.00% OF INDIA, MAIN BRANCH, PU RI
3STATE BANK 3370038604004.03.14 26.03.15 3 87 075 9.00% OF INDIA, MAIN BRANCH, PU RI
4STATE BANK 3375077573026.03.14 26.03.15 4 31 679 9.00% OF INDIA, MAIN BRANCH, PU RI
5STATE BANK 3375351653626.03.14 26.03.15 7 70 756 9.00% OF INDIA, (TEMPLE BRANCH)
6IDBI BANK 40310600002732603.03.14 26.03.15 4 64 000 9.10%
7PUNJAB 322400DP0000591626.03.14 26.03.15 3 02 000 9.00% NATIONAL BANK
8AXIS BANK 91304005440999709.12.13 26.03.15 48 509 8.75%
9BANK OF 51125611000141528.11.13 26.03.15 9 00 000 9.05% INDIA, BBSR
10BANK OF 55525051000000426.03.14 26.03.15 10 14 000 10.00% INDIA 11BANK OF 55525051000000527.03.14 27.03.15 17 74 122 10.00% INDIA 12STATE BANK 3351137697810.12.13 27.03.15 2 82 800 9.00% OF INDIA, (TEMPLE BRANCH)
13HDFC BANK, 5030003655819627.03.14 27.03.15 24 00 000 8.75% PURI TOTAL 99 46 103
24 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
B FIXED DEPOSIT (FOUNDATION FUND) 1UCO BANK 2062031004369112.06.13 12.06.14 1 83 00 000 8.75%
2UCO BANK 2062031004414801.07.13 01.07.14 47 49 000 8.75%
3UCO BANK 2062031004455118.07.13 18.07.14 90 27 000 8.75%
4UCO BANK 2062031004479701.08.13 01.08.14 46 58 500 8.75%
5UCO BANK 2062031004522016.08.13 16.08.14 45 78 000 8.75%
6UCO BANK 2062031004570106.09.13 06.09.14 1 42 42 000 9.50%
7UCO BANK 2062031004714911.11.13 11.11.14 69 42 000 9.00%
8UCO BANK 2062031004787302.12.13 02.12.14 71 83 000 9.00%
9BANK OF 55525051000000121.03.14 21.03.15 1 00 00 000 10.00% INDIA 10BANK OF 55525051000000222.03.14 22.03.15 4 20 00 000 10.00% INDIA 11BANK OF 55525051000000325.03.14 25.03.15 3 00 00 000 10.00% INDIA 12BANK OF 55525051000000426.03.14 26.03.15 8 70 00 000 10.00% INDIA 13BANK OF 2429030000369028.03.14 28.03.15 6 00 00 000 10.00% BARODA 14BANK OF 55524371000016531.03.14 31.03.15 3 04 00 000 10.00% INDIA TOTAL 32 90 79 500 GRAND TOTAL 278 19 71 481 FOUNDATION FUND
As per letter no. OTA-1-C-28/88-2461 dtd 22.08.1983 of the Law Deptt., Govt. of Odisha 90% of the offerings placed in Hundi shall go to the Foundation Fund and 10% to the Temple Funds towards Administration Share. In pursuance of Shree Jagannath Temple Amendment Act, 1983 published in Law deptt. Notification no. 7094 dtd 03.05.1983 Hundi is installed in Shree Jagannath Temple, Puri since 23.08.1983 for placing of offerings as donation by pilgrims and devotees visiting the temple from time to time. During the year 2012 – 13 & 2013 – 14 a total sum of Rs56231368 .00 and 57023782.00 respectively have been collected from Hundi. The details of collection are given below:
% of Share 2012 – 13 (in Rs) 2013 – 14 (in Rs) 90% 50623854.00 51331703.00 10% 5607514.00 5692079.00 Total 56231368.00 57023782.00 Out of the total Hundi collection ,90% share of collection is deposited in the UCO Bank, Temple Branch A/c no. 20620100001440(Foundation Fund A/c) and 10% share is deposited in UCO Bank, Temple Branch A/c no. 20620100000001. The 90% share is invested as TDR. Interest accrued out of the investment of Foundation Fund is distributed as (a) 75% towards Welfare of Sevaks (b) 25% towards temple expenses.
An abstract position of Foundation Fund investment for the year 2012 – 13 & 2013 – 14 is furnished below:
O.B. as on 01.04.2012 Rs 22,72,22,500.00
Investment made during the year 2012 – 13 Rs 5,02,64,000.00
C.B. as 31.03.2013 Rs 27,74,86,500.00
O.B. as on 01.04.2013 Rs 27,74,86,500.00
Investment during the year 2013 – 14 Rs 5,15,93,000.00
25 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
C.B. as on 31.03.2014 Rs 32,90,79,500.00
CORPUS FUND
Corpus fund of the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration, Puri consists of General Donation (ATM, Online, M.O. Donation Boxes, Receipt against M.R. through Office) sale of land, land acquisition, PAPO, own saving, Kothabhoga Dana Yojana, Special govt. grant and from Bheta Box. The Bheta Box Dana Yojana has been newly created during the financial year 2013 – 14. The receipt under corpus fund of the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration Office for the year 2012 – 13 & 2013 – 14 is furnished below:
Head of Receipt 12 – 13 (in Rs) 13 – 14 (in Rs) 1. Sale of Land 72,56,398.00 98,08,734.00 2. PAPO (Annuity) 7,91,528.00 7,91,528.00 3. Land Acquisition 1,98,72,625.00 2,01,96,055.00 4. M.O. 7,52,195.00 8,11,006.00 5. General Donation 89,34,880.00 1,05,17,163.00 6. ATM & Online 13,90,536.91 13,26,580.25 7. Govt. Grant 3,00,00,000.00 3,00,00,000.00 TOTAL 6,89,98,162.91 7,34,51,066.25 The investment position of corpus fund is given below.
O.B. as on 01.04.2012 Rs 179,96,53,236.00
Investment made during the year 2012 – 13 Rs 31,80,91,897.00
C.B. as 31.03.2013 Rs 211,77,45,133.00
O.B. as on 01.04.2013 Rs 211,77,45,133.00
Investment during the year 2013 – 14 Rs 33,51,46,848.00
C.B. as on 31.03.2014 Rs 245,28,91,981.00
Loss of temple fund due to late reinvestment;-
While checking the investment register w.r.t. cash book and files for the year 2012-13, it has come to the notice of the audit that some fixed deposits which had matured on their predetermined date of maturity were kept idle in the bank without reinvestment which resulted in a loss of interest of Rs 2,23,746.00 as calculated below:
TDR No Date of Maturity Dateof encashment Amount No of days kept Rate of Interest Loss of idle (in %) interest 14393000334 01.07.12 09.07.12 110000000 8 9.1 219397 14393007283 17.10.12 31.10.12 60000 14 9.25 213 32012553921 17.10.12 16.11.12 328000 31 9.25 2577 31995323892 19.10.12 16.11.12 158000 27 9.25 1081 53757130 17.10.12 31.10.12 52929 14 9.40 191 72771 14.03.13 23.03.13 126000 9 9.25 287 TOTAL 223746 The reason for such loss of Rs 223746 was asked through objection memo. But in response no reply is furnished by the local authority. Hence assuming the deeds being intentional, Sri Pradyumna Kumar Tripathy, DyAdfministrator( F) and Sri Hari Hara Das Moahapatra Accountant are held responsible for such loss.
26 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
PARA: 8 ADVANCE
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2012-2013
Slno Advance Cashbook Advance Advance Total(In Rs:) Advance Advance Advance Advance Advance Difference Remarks Outstanding Name Outstandi Paid adjusted Outstandi Outstandi Outstandi Outstandi (In Rs:) as on (DD ng (In Rs:) during the during the ng as per ng Audit ng as per ng Cash MM YYYY) Year Year (DD MM (In Rs:) (DD MM Book(In under under YYYY) YYYY) Rs:) Audit(In Audit(In Audit Cash Rs:) Rs:) Book 1 01-04-2012 Main 26378640 16894889 43273529.0 24677625 31-03-201 18595904 31-03-201 18595904 0.00 Cash .00 .00 0 .00 3 .00 3 .00 Book GRAND TOTAL 26378640 16894889 43273529.0 24677625 18595904 18595904 0.00 .00 .00 0 .00 .00 .00
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2013-2014
Slno Advance Cashbook Advance Advance Total(In Rs:) Advance Advance Advance Advance Advance Difference Remarks Outstanding Name Outstandi Paid adjusted Outstandi Outstandi Outstandi Outstandi (In Rs:) as on (DD ng (In Rs:) during the during the ng as per ng Audit ng as per ng Cash MM YYYY) Year Year (DD MM (In Rs:) (DD MM Book(In under under YYYY) YYYY) Rs:) Audit(In Audit(In Audit Cash Rs:) Rs:) Book 2 01-04-2013 Main 18595904 29108622 47704526.0 18307741 31-03-201 29396785 31-03-201 29396785 0.00 Cash .00 .00 0 .00 4 .00 4 .00 Book GRAND TOTAL 18595904 29108622 47704526.0 18307741 29396785 29396785 0.00 .00 .00 0 .00 .00 .00
Comments : The statement C-1 showing the advance paid and Statement C-2 showing the advance adjusted during the tear 2012-13 & 13-14 attached to the Audit report are inclusive the festival advance Audit has calculated the Festival advance and general Adv separately for the year 2012-13 and 2013-14 for better approach as stated below. The Local Authority is advised to maintain both the Advance and their corresponding adjustment separately henceforth for better apprehension.
Advance position General Advance Festival advance Total O.B.as on 1.4.12 25411340 967300 26378640 Advance paid during 12-13 15004889 1890000 16894889 Total 40416229 2857300 43273529 Advance adjusted during 12-13 22957325 1720300 24677625 Advance outstanding as on 17458904 1137000 18595904 31.3.13 O.B.as on 1.4.13 17458904 1137000 18595904 Advance paid during 13-14 26300222 2808400 29108622 Total 43759126 3945400 47704526 Advance adjusted during 13-14 16048841 2258900 18307741 Advance outstanding as on 27710285 1686500 29396785 31.3.14
Year wise breakup of general advance adjusted during the year 2012-13
Advance involved Prior to 2012-13 Rs. 11634498.00
Advance involved for 2012-13 Rs. 11322827.00
------
Total: Rs. 22957325.00
------
27 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Year wise breakup of general advance adjusted during the year 2013-14
Advance involved Prior to 2012-13 Rs. 2524361.00
Advance involved for 2012-13 Rs. 2785382.00
Advance involved for 2013-14 Rs. 10739098.00
------
Total: Rs.16048841.00
------
Year wise breakup of outstanding general advance of Rs. 27710285.00 as on 31.3.14
Prior to 2012-13 Rs. 11252481.00
2012-13 Rs. 896680.00
2013-14 Rs. 15561124.00
------
Total: Rs.27710285.00
------
Advance outstanding for more than one year as per Cash Book which is inclusive festival advance.:(OSP-206)
While checking advance ledger w.r.t. voucher & cash book for the 2012-13 and 2013-14, it is found that a total sum of Rs.29396785.00 is outstanding as on 31.3.14. Although the details of outstanding advance relating to the year 2012-13 and 2013-14 is available but the details of outstanding advance relating to the year prior to 2012-13 is not available as no abstract position of advance is given in the pages of advance ledger.
The abstract of outstanding advance as on 31.3.14 as obtained from the source of computer section of temple office is as follows. The details of outstanding advance i.e. given in statement of Rs.27683285.00 is worked out on the base of Advance Ledger only,which is not tallied with Cash Book figure.As such, the local authority is advised to short out the actual advance position and apprise to Audit in next meeting.
Prior to 2012-13 Rs. 12972821.00
For 2012-13 Rs. 924840.00
For 2013-14 Rs. 15499124.00
------
Total: Rs. 29396785.00
------
As per G.O No. 2221/F Date-08.03.2002 any advance paid if not adjusted for more than a year, is treated as a loss to the institution and should be suggested for recovery. Hence the authority of temple administration is requested to recover advance remained outstanding for more than one year amounting to Rs13897661.00(Rs.12972821.00. +924840) from the person concerned/Agency & compliance reported to audit. Further, in spite of issue of Audit Objection Memo, the local authority has not produced the year wise break up of outstanding advance of Rs.12972821.00 related to the years prior to 2012-13. Audit also could not be successful to ascertain the outstanding advance relating to the year prior to 2012-13 as the accounts of the temple administration is not audited for the year 2012-13. Under such circumstances, the unadjusted advance of the year 2012-13 amounting to Rs.924840.00 is suggested for recovery as per the aforesaid circular of Finance Deptt.
The details of outstanding advance for the year 2012-13 is given below.
Outstanding advance as on 31.3.14
Sl.No. Name of the person Vr.No/Date Purpose Amount
1Sudarsan Makap(CT) 3461/31.3.13 Repair of biribataghar in temple 30000
28 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
2Rabinarayana Pujapanda(HC) 478/24.5.12 Petty expenses during carfestival 40000
718/17.6.12 Petty expenses during carfestival 40000
3Basudev Mohapatra (UDC) 188/23.4.12 Spl. Festival expenses during chandan 10000 yatra-2012
541/29.5.12 Spl. Festival expenses 3500
2000/16.10.12 Spl. Festival expenses for solopuja-2012 4000
3152/28.2.13 Day to day expenses 5000
4Sudhansu Sekhar Pattanaik (Asst. 244/28.4.12 Distribution of khoraki 50000 Commandar)
2135/1.11.12 Distribution of khoraki 20000
2136/1.11.12 Distribution of khoraki 20000
3356/21.3.13 Purchase of basket and flower 1500
3357/21.3.13 Distribution of p. stone to makap sevaks on 63748 25.4.12 to 1.6.12
3358/21.3.13 Distribution of p. stone to makap sevaks on 31944 1.4.12 to 24.4.12
3359/21.3.13 Distribution of p. stone to Pujapanda sevaks on 11979 1.4.12 to 24.4.12
3360/21.3.13 Distribution of p. stone to Khuntia sevaks on 37104 21.3.13 to 31.3.13
3361/21.3.13 Distribution of p. stone to Khuntia sevaks on 31944 1.4.12 to 24.4.12
3362/21.3.13 Distribution of p. stone to Puspalak Nijog on 19965 1.4.12 to 24.4.12
3363/21.3.13 Distribution of p. stone to Puspalak Nijog on 11595 21.3.12 to 31.3.12
3364/21.3.13 Distribution of pindika collection on 21.3.12 to 6957 31.3.12 to pujapanda sevaks
29 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
3365/21.3.13 Distribution of pindika collection on 25.4.12 to 63748 1.3.12 to k. sevaks
3366/21.3.13 Distribution of pindika collection on 25.4.12 to 39842 1.6 .12 to puspalak sevaks
3367/21.3.13 Distribution of pindika collection to Pujapanda 23905 sevaks on24.4.12 to 1.6.12
5Sarat chandra Moharana (JE, Elect) 246/27.4.12 Purchase of electrical goods 2650
247/27.4.12 Purchase of PUCA cable for use in temple 6600
626/14.6.12 Repair of Highmast light 18000
1814/28.9.12 Purchase of electrical goods 1350
1674/13.9.12 Purchase of tolls for electrical maintenance of 30000 sadar office
1820/29.9.12 Purchase of motor use in nijog room 7000
2708/5.1.13 Electri wiring photohgar inside temple 2000
6Damodar Panda(ALO) 308/4.5.12 Tour expenses at Supreme Court, New Delhi 20000 (EPF Tribunal)
1832/29.9.12 Tour expenses at Supreme Court, New Delhi 20000 (EPF Tribunal)
7Sukanta Kumar Mishra (DLR) 712/16.6.12 T.A expenses to BBSR for official work 200
3446/30.3.13 T.A expenses to BBSR for official work 200
8Gopinath Das(Electrician) 3318/18.3.13 Purchase of electrical goods for office use 5000
9Arunranjan Panigrahi (House Keeping) 1183/10.8.12 Cleaning of drain of new building of Sadar office 3000
10M/S. Thyssen Erupp Elevator (India) 798/6.12.12 Supply and cost of Inverter of elevator of 136200 Pvt. Ltd. Nilachal Complex
30 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
11Executive Engineer (R&B) 875/26.12.12 Colouring of Front side building of Badadanda 89709
12Laxman Behera 245/28.4.12 T.A expenses 2000
13Ram Chandra Khatua 245/28.4.12 T.A expenses 2000
14Rabindranath Sarangi 1837/29.9.12 Day to day contigency expenses of Jatni office 5000
15Kasinath pradhan 3262/22.3.13 T.A expenses 2000
16Chittaranjan Mishra 3383/22.3.13 T.A expenses 200
17Prakash Ch.Das 3348/20.3.13 Purchase of water filter and other expense of 5000 Berhampur office
Total: 924840
Non-production of documentary evidence in support of adjustment of outstanding advance for more than one year. (OSP-232-233)
1. On observation of Advance Position in Temple Office as upto 31.3.14, it is noticed that a huge amount of Rs. 29396785.00 is outstanding and waiting for adjustment voucher/ cash return. Audit drew the attention of Local Authority to report the adjustment position to audit for settlement of the advance payment but the authority showed dormant attitude towards the objection memo to the end of audit. As the Lord’s office is not expected to sustain the loss for long time the Local Authority is advised to effect necessary recovery from the person concerned at an early date.
2. It is further noticed that an amount of Rs.21340869.30 is outstanding against the officials as detailed in a separate sheet placed below the Statement C-2, which shows the list of defaulters at the beginning of the year 2012-13 pending the adjustment. Again without assessing their capability, integrity and honesty again a huge amount of Rs.13612809.00 as detailed column no.3 in the table have been paid to them. The advance payment order issued to them bear only a mild warning that would return the adjustment voucher and balance cash within one month. The order bears no indication of penalty /punishment both in financially and administratively, for which crores of rupees of temple fund is laying idle with their individual possession. The Local Authority is requested to take keen interest for adjustment / necessary recovery. As per Rule 13 of OGFR regarding irrecoverable advance it is clearly mentioned that undue payment of advance to the defaulter an officer who is responsible for the detail, control, accounting and supervision of advances shall, as soon as any advance is found to be irrecoverable, take necessary steps to get the advances written off the accounts under the sanction of the appropriate authority and advise the Accounts Officer accordingly in order that he may make the necessary adjustment . Now the temple Authority is requested to explain,what effective steps are taken to stimulate the concerned officer for utilization of paid advance and recovery of balance cash.
In response to audit objection memo the Local Authority has replied that "Recoupment vouchers have already been submitted by the employees concerned. Action is being taken to adjust the advances in accounts records". Till production of detail adjustment the amount is held under objection.
31 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
PARA: 9 GRANTS
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2012-2013
Slno Grants Grants Grants Total(In Rs:) Grants Spent Grants Grants Remarks Outstanding Outstanding Received during the unspent as unspent (In as on (DD (In Rs:) during the Year under on (DD MM Rs:) MM YYYY) Year under Audit(In Rs:) YYYY) Audit(In Rs:) 1 01-04-2012 0.00 101680000.00 101680000.00 101680000.00 31-03-2013 0.00 Doetails of grant received is given separetly & upladed in statement. GRAND 0.00 101680000.00 101680000.00 101680000.00 0.00 TOTAL
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2013-2014
Slno Grants Grants Grants Total(In Rs:) Grants Spent Grants Grants Remarks Outstanding Outstanding Received during the unspent as unspent (In as on (DD (In Rs:) during the Year under on (DD MM Rs:) MM YYYY) Year under Audit(In Rs:) YYYY) Audit(In Rs:) 2 01-04-2013 0.00 127680000.00 127680000.00 127680000.00 31-03-2014 0.00 Doetails of grant received is given separetly & upladed in statement. GRAND 0.00 127680000.00 127680000.00 127680000.00 0.00 TOTAL
Comments : The entire grant has been utilised for the purpose for which the same was sanctioned.The details of grant received are given below:
DETAILS OF GRANTS RECEIVED DURING 2012 - 13
Sl. No. Sanction Order & Date Sanctioning Authority Purpose Amount (in Rs)
16012/l..,06.06.12 Deptt. of Law Remuneration of staff 2,00,00,000
26027/L.,06.06.12 Deptt. of Law Remuneration of Gajapati Maharaj 1,80,000
36031/L.,06.06.12 Deptt. of Law Temple Administration 55,00,000
46016/L.,06.06.12 Deptt. of Law Festival Expenses 1,60,00,000
56020/L.,06.06.12 Deptt. of Law Developmental Project 2,00,00,000
63480/L., 21.03.13 Deptt. of Law Remuneration of staff 1,00,00,000
76023/L., 06.06.12 Deptt. of Law Corpus Fund 3,00,00,000
TOTAL 10,16,80,000
DETAILS OF GRANTS RECEIVED DURING 2013 - 14
Sl. No. Sanction Order & Date Sanctioning Authority Purpose Amount (in Rs)
16071/L.,13.06.2013 Deptt. of Law Remuneration of staff 4,00,00,000
32 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
26075/L.,13.06.2013 Deptt. of Law Remuneration of Gajapati Maharaj 1,80,000
36079/L.,13.06.13 Deptt. of Law Expenditure for Temple 75,00,000 Adminstration
46083/L.,13.06.13 Deptt. of Law Festival expenditure 3,00,00,000
56087/L.,13.06,13 Deptt. of Law Curpus fund 3,00,00,000
66091/L.,13.06.13 Deptt. of Law Project Development 2,00,00,000
Total 12,76,80,000
33 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
PARA: 10 UTILISATION CERTIFICATE
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2012-2013
Slno U.C U.C U.C due for Total(In Rs:) U.C Submitted U.C needs to U.C needs to Remarks Outstanding Outstanding(In submission during the be submitted be submitted as on (DD Rs:) during the period under as on as on MM YYYY) period under Audit(In Rs:) outstanding as outstanding (In Audit(In Rs:) on (DD MM Rs:) YYYY) 1 01-04-2012 68990000.00 101680000.00 170670000.00 90180000.00 31-03-2013 80490000.00 GRAND 68990000.00 0.00 170670000.00 90180000.00 80490000.00 TOTAL
Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. - 2013-2014
Slno U.C U.C U.C due for Total(In Rs:) U.C Submitted U.C needs to U.C needs to Remarks Outstanding Outstanding(In submission during the be submitted be submitted as on (DD Rs:) during the period under as on as on MM YYYY) period under Audit(In Rs:) outstanding as outstanding (In Audit(In Rs:) on (DD MM Rs:) YYYY) 2 01-04-2013 80490000.00 127680000.00 208170000.00 101680000.00 31-03-2014 106490000.00 GRAND 80490000.00 0.00 208170000.00 101680000.00 106490000.00 TOTAL
Comments : The details of U.C. submitted are given below:
DETAILS OF U. C. SUBMITTED DURING 2012 - 13
Sl. No. Sanction Order & Date Letter No. & Date of Purpose Amount (in Rs) submission of U.C.
15217/L., 28.05.11 5902/ 19.04.12 Developmental project (State Plan) 1,00,00,000
25226/L., 28.05.11 5902/ 19.04.12 Temple Administration 50,00,000
35230/L., 28.05.11 5902/ 19.04.12 Festival expense 1,50,00,000
45234/L., 28.05.11 5902/ 19.04.12 Staff Remuneration 2,00,00,000
55238/L., 28.05.11 5902/ 19.04.12 Remuneration of Gajapati Maharaj 1,80,000
62460/L., 03.03.12 7388/ 10.05.12 Developmental project (State Plan) 1,00,00,000
76023/L., 06.06.12 10954/ 23.07.12 Corpus Fund 3,00,00,000
Total 9,01,80,000
DETAILS OF U. C. SUBMITTED DURING 2013 - 14
34 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Sl. No. Sanction Order & Date Letter No. & Date of submission Purpose Amount (in Rs) of U.C.
16012/l.,06.06.12 3967/ 15.04.13 Remuneration of staff 2,00,00,000
26027/L.,06.06.12 3967/ 15.04.13 Remuneration of Gajapati Maharaj 1,80,000
36031/L.,06.06.12 3967/ 15.04.13 Expenditure for Temple 55,00,000 Adminstration
46016/L.,06.06.12 3967/ 15.04.13 Festival expenditure 1,60,00,000
56087/L.,13.06,13 5997/ 05.08.13 Curpus fund 3,00,00,000
66020/L.,06.06.12 3967/ 15.04.13 Development Project 2,00,00,000
73480/L., 21.03.13 3967/ 15.04.13 Remuneration of staff 1,00,00,000
Total 10,16,80,000
N.B.--.; As the audit for the year 11-12 has not yet been conducted, the opening balances of Grants & U.C. as on 1.4.12 was asked through audit objection statement( OSP-92) but the same was not produced to audit till close of the audit. Therefore the opening balance as on 1.4.2012 has been taken from the Grants/U.C. register.
YEAR WISE BREAK UP OF Rs. 106490000.00
PERIOD AMOUNT REMARKS 2013 - 14 Rs. 97680000.00 U.C. submitted vide Letter No. 4245 dtd 19.04.2014 2010 - 11 Rs. 405000.00 2009 - 10 Rs. 8000000.00 2007 - 08 Rs. 405000.00 TOTAL Rs. 106490000.00 U.C. Pending for submission OSP-92
While checking Grants Register w.r.t. files of grant and U.C. it is noticed that U.C. pending for submission as on 31.03.14 is of Rs. 10,64,90,000.00. Out of which U.C. is submitted for Rs. 9,76,80,000.00 vide letter no. 4245 dtd 19.04.2014. Balance U.C. of Rs. 88,10,000.00 is still pending for submission. Details of U.C. pending is given below.
Sl. No. Sanction Order & Date Name of the Sanctioning Authority Purpose Amount (in Rs)
1 403/ 15.03.08 Lodging House Fund Sanitation and welfare 4,05,000.00 of Sevayat dispensary
2 15178/L, 31.12.09 Law Deptt. Festival Grant for Govind Dwadashi 30,00,000.00
3 6420/L, 30.05.09 Law Deptt. Festival Grant for Govind Dwadashi 50,00,000.00
4 448/ 23.03.11 Lodging House Fund Sanitation and welfare 4,05,000.00 of Sevayat dispensary
The reason of non-submission of U.C. was asked through audit objection memo No 62/ dt. 20.12.14. But no reply has been furnished by the local authority till close of the audit. Hence, it is requested to submit the U.C to the funding agency & compliance reported to audit. .
35 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
PARA: 11 MISAPPROPRIATION & DEFALCATION
11.1 - Less Credit of collection amount due to totaling mistake OSP 106
While checking the Pindica collection for the period 2012-13, it was noticed that a sum of Rs 3,000/- was less credited to temple fund than the actual amount collectedin the DCR as detailed below.
Date Actual amount collected (in Rs.) Amount deposited in Bank (in Amount less credited (in Rs) Rs) 27.5.12 10493.10 Deposited vide MR 28.5.12 6693.00 No-1202/2.6.12 29.5.12 8445.38 30.5.12 7699.68 31.5.12 8703.27 Total= 42,034.00 39,034.00 3,000.00 In response to the audit objection statement ,a sum of Rs 3000.00 has been recovered from Sri Pradita Ku Miashra Collection in charge of Pindika vide MR No. 467 dtd 30.04.15 who is responsible for such misappropriation.
11.2 - Less Credit of collection amount (OSP 170)
1. Less credit to DCR/Siha against the actual collection amount.
While checking the Money Receipts towards installation of Dhwaja wrt to the DCRs/Siha for the period 2013-14, it was observed that an amount of Rs 105/- was less credited to temple fund than the actual collection amount as detailed below.
Date Receipt Book No Receipt No. Actual amount Amount credited to DCR Amount less credited collected (in Rs) (in Rs) (in Rs) 13.4.13 2527 252681 140 70 70 23.5.13 2542 254122 70 35 35 Total 105 2. Less Credit of collection amount due to totaling mistake.
On checking the totaling of the Dhwaja Siha/ DCR, it is noticed that Rs 50/- has been less credited to the temple fund due to totaling mistake as detailed below.
Date Actual amount collected (in Amount deposited in Bank (in Rs) Amount less credited (in Rs) Rs.) 2.5.13 2970/- 2920/- 50/-
Siha No.256 In response to the audit objection statement, the local authority recovered Rs 155.00 from Sri Satya Narayan Mohanty, Colletion. Clerk vide MR No. 515 dtd 02.05.15 Who was responsible for such loss.
11.3 - Less credit of collection amount due to wrong totaling in DCR (OSP 240)
While checking the donation DCR of the Gundicha information centre ,a sum of Rs 900.00 has been less deposited due to wrong totaling at page No. 70 of the DCR. The total collection amount shown as Rs 6999.00 instead of Rs 7899.00 in the DCR,. As a result Rs 900.00 was less credited to the Sri Jagannath Temple Fund. However, the same has been recovered from Sri Anil Kumar Patra, DA vide MR No. 458 dtd 30.04.15 for this Sri Anil Kumar Patra,collection clerk of information centre is held responsible.
36 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
11.4 - Less credit of Hundi Collection in the Bank A/C OSP 95-96
While checking the Daily Hundi Collection Register w.r.t. the General Cash Book and UCO Bank Pass Book No-1440 &01 for the year 2012 – 13 and 2013 – 14, it was found that on the following dates, the amount credited in the bank A/C is less as compared to the total collection. Hence the local authority was requested to comply to audit the reason of such less credit of Rs 531.00, as detailed below, vide memo no. 65 dtd 22.12.14. In response to such memo, no reply has been furnished by the local authority. Hence Rs531.00 is suggested for recovery from the person(s) responsible.
Date Actual amount Actual amount credited in bank (in Rs) Difference/ Less collected (in Rs) 90% share (deposited in 10% share (deposited Total credited amount A/c no. 1440) in A/c no. 1) (in Rs) 08.05.12 & 253636.00 228156.00 25351.00 253507.00 129.00 09.05.12 16.06.12 75100.00 67500.00 7500.00 75000.00 100.00 21.04.13, 22.04.13 467745.00 420962.00 46773.00 467735.00 10.00 & 23.04.13 14.08.13, 15.08.13 561877.00 505608.00 56179.00 561787.00 90.00 & 16.08.13 17.08.13, 18.08.13 483016.00 434534.00 48282.00 482816.00 200.00 & 19.08.13 24.08.13, 25.08.13 418616.00 376753.00 41861.00 418614.00 2.00 & 26.08.13 TOTAL 531.00 It is noteworthy to mention here that the officials were engaged in counting of Hundi collection were signed in the Daily Hundi Collection Register without their designation. So audit is unable fix responsibility against the official those are responsible for such loss.It is suggested to put initial with their designation henceforth.
11.5 - Non credit of collection from tenants in the DCR OSP 189
While checking the Arrival & Departure register and DCR for the year 2013 – 14 of Shree Gundicha Bhakta Niwas it was found that during July’13 the following rooms (mentioned in the table below) were allotted to the pilgrims and as against the allotted rooms rents were also collected. But the date of M.R.s shown for collection for the above said rents was Jan’15 instead of July’13. The reason of such irregularity was asked through audit objection memo no. 96 dtd 27.03.15.
In reply to the memo the local authority has only mentioned that as against Sl. no. 1, Rs 1300.00 only has been deposited against MR no. 94 and against sl. no. 6, Rs 300.00 has been deposited against MR no. 76. Audit has checked these MRs and their corresponding entry in the DCR Hence,the recovered amount of (Rs 1300..00+300.00.)has been dropped.
The local authority has further mentioned in the reply that rest of the amounts i.e, Rs 14000.00 have been taken to the DCR on dates 08.01.15 and 09.01.15 but the said DCR has not been produced to audit for verification. But as per the fact produced by the local authority the amount of Rs 14000.00 has been taken in the account of Temple Administration after a long period of 17 months. As per OTC Rule 6(1), all money received or collected should be deposited in the public accounts within 3 working days. In this case the said rule has not been adhered.
So, Rs 14000.00 is treated as misappropriation of fund for 17 months and is subject to imposition of penal interest @ 9% p.a. which amounts to Rs 1785.00.
Hence the Local Authority is requested to recover Rs 1785.00 from Sri Arun Ranjan Panigrahi ,HKE ,who is responsible for such loss failing which Sri Saroj Kumar Roy,Asst Administratorand Sri Prasanna Kumar Hota Dy.Administrator are consider as responsible.It is requested to produce the said DCR to audit for verification and the reason of delay in deposit may be complied to audit. Till production of the DCR, Rs 14000.00 is held under objection. The local authority is further requested to avoid such type of mass financial irregularity.
Sl. No. GR No. Name of the occupant Room No. MR No. (as recorded in Amount collected the A/D register) (in Rs.) 1 29 T. Barik C 206 7399 3000 (Rs 1300 deposited vide MR no. 94) 2 32 K. K. Mohanty C 102 7421 3100
37 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
3 34 Prasanna Choudhury C 006 7400 1000 4 37 Alekh Gajendra C 102 7422 1000 5 38 Bibhuti Mishra C 004 7401 350 6 44 Tridibesh Acharya B 104 7423 650 (Rs 300 is deposited vide MR no. 76) 7 56 Prakash Ch. Sahoo C 005 7402 350 8 59 Jawahar Subudhi C 101 7403 350 9 61 Balabhadra Mohapatra C 102 7404 1050 10 62 Ajay Das C 001 7405 700 11 63 Rajesh Ku Maharana C 108 7406 350 12 64 Minakhi Mishra C 005 7407 350 13 66 Deepak Sahu C 203 7424 1400 14 75 Pradeep Ku Pradhan B 204 7408 650 15 85 Akhil Ku Samal B 205 7409 650 16 94 Bishnu Prasad Das B 008 7410 650 TOTAL 15600 - Rs 1600 = Rs 14000
11.6 - Misappropriation of cash OSP 263due to totaling mistate in Cash Book
While checking the totaling and balancing of the General Cash Book for the year 2012 - 13, it was found that in(Vol III) of General Cash Book on dated 10.09.2012, the total expenditure by cash was Rs 240907.00. But Rs 241573.00 was shown as expenditure on that date. For which the closing balance of cash appeared to be Rs 413125.31, as mentioned in pg 124, which has also been carried forward as the opening balance on 11.09.12. But the closing balance of cash as on 10.09.2012 should actually be Rs 413791.31 which resulted in a misappropriation of cash of Rs 666.00.
Against the above irregularity the Local Authority was asked through objection memo no. 138 dtd 22.04.15 to ensure the above fact . In response to OSP-263 the local authority has not furnished any reply. Hence Rs 666.00 is suggested for recovery from Sri Harihara Das Mahapatra Accountant who is consider as responsible.
11.7 - Less collection from sale of books and magazines (OSP 15)
While checking the stock register of private publication of Sri Gundicha temple information centre, it was found that Rs 90.00 was collected as against Rs115.00 which resulted in less collection of Rs 50.00 from the sale of two copies of Sri Sri Bhakta Charita Mala. The details w.r.t the stock register is shown in the table below.
Name of the Book/megazine Date of sale Page no. M.R no. Cost of the Salable Books Sri Sri JagannathBbhakta 10.07.2013 111 33631 25.00 Charita Mala Sri Sri Jagannath Bbhakta 27.07.2013 111 33650 25.00 Charita Mala. Total 50.00 In response to the audit objection memo, the local authority recovered Rs 50.00 from Sri Anil Ku. Patra, Publicity. Clerk . vide MR No. 3074 dtd 20.09.14 and taken to Cash Book Page No-14 of Vol-IV .Sri Anil Ku. Patra, Publicity. Clerk who was responsible for less credit.
11.8 - Less credit of collection amount (OSP 51)
While checking the Parimanik daily collection report w.r.t counter foils,it is found that tickets have been sold but some are not enlisted in the movement analysis register which resulted less credit of Rs 175.00 to the cash book. The details are furnished below
Particulars Ticket no sold but not enlisted in value of each ticket in rupees Less/non credited to cash book movement analysis
38 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Mangala arati 14501 25.00 25.00 Sakala Dhupa 15861-to 158620 25.00*2 50.00 Total 75.00 75.00
In response to the audit objection memo, the local authority recovered Rs 75.00 from Sri Chaturbhuja Barik, Fees Collector vide MR no. 4534 dtd 29.11.14.Sri Chaturbhuja Barik, Fees Collector was responsible for loss .
11.9 - Less credit shown in DCR (OSP 84)
While checking the donation collection Money Receipt of Shree Jagannath Temple branch office with respect to DCR, it is observed that a sum of Rs 501.00 is collected as donation against M.R No.93548. But Rs 50.00 has been credited to DCR instead of Rs 501.00, which resulted in less deposit of Rs451.00 in the Cash book. The reference detail is displayed in the table below.
Date MR book no MR No Amount collected Amount credited to Ref to Page No. of through MR DCR DCR 04-11-2013 1871 93548 501.00 50.00 97 In response to the audit objection memo the local authority has recovered balance amount of Rs 451.00 from Sri Lingaraj Rath, Fees Collector vide MR no. 4141 dtd 26.11.14. Sri Lingaraj Rath, Fees Collector was responsible for such misappropriation of cash.
11.10 - Excess payment shown due to totalling mistake of Daily Palia Reward. OSP-266
While checking the cash voucher V.No.3362/15.3.14 w.r.t cash book for the year 2013-14, it is found that a sum of Rs. 1020.00 was excess paid as per list of payment of palia reward for the month2/14 attached with the voucher due to totaling mistake of Daily Palia Reward.
Actual amount Amount paid Excess 500780 501800 1020 In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority and Rs.1020.00 has been suggested for recovery from the Smt. Sujata Mohapatra, Cashier who had misappropriated the cash.Failing which Smt.Janaki Karuna Devi Accountant and Sri Tripati Nanda Dash Dy Administrator (F) are held responsible.
11.11 - Less collection from sale of books and magazines (OSP 16)
While checking the stock register of Shree Gundicha temple information centre w.r.t sale receipts, it was found that following books has been sold but as against the sale receipts are not available to audit.. The details of sale of books w.r.t the stock register is furnished in the table below.
Name of the book/magazine No. of copies. Date of issue Page no. Amount in rupees Vesha pkt photo 1 15.05.2013 158 150 Sri mandira patrika 1 18.07.2013 163 10 Sri jagannatha astakam 2 31.07.2012 80 100 Baichitramaya Sri Mandira 1 23.06.2012 154 35 Total: 295.00 In response to the objection memo the local authority recovered Rs 295.00 from Sri Anil Ku. Patra, Publicity. Clerk vide MR no. 3074 dtd 20.0914and taken to Cash Book Page No-14 of Vol-IV . Sri Anil Ku. Patra, Publicity. Clerk was responsible for this misappropriation of cash.
11.12 - Double expenditure booked towards daily palia reward OSP-169
39 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
On checking of Daily Palia Reward Register w.r.t. cash voucher & cash book for the month of 5/13, it was found that a sum of Rs. 840/- expenditure has been booked twice towards payment of daily palia reward which was paid to Sri. Bata krushna Pradhani vide Sl. No.367 of the Daily Palia Register at page No.23 vide cash Vr. No -.735/18.7.13 and again in cash Vr.No -700/17.6.13.
In response to audit objection no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violating the Rule 14 and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule-1968.Hence,a sum of Rs 840.00 has been suggested for recovery from Smt. Sujata Mohapatra, Cashier failing which Smt.Janaki Karuna Devi Accontant and Sri Tripati Nanda Dash Dy Administrator (F) are held responsible.
11.13 - Mis appropriation of cash due to booking of double expenditure towards payment of Palia Sebak rewardOSP231
While checking the cash vouchers of the year 2013 – 14 w.r.t. Palia Reward register and Car Festival register it was seen that a sum of Rs. 4583.00 was booked as expenditure twice in the Cash book as detailed below.
Vr no/ date Amount due to Name of the Palia Month of Ref.to Ref. to the voucher expr. booked Excess payment paid payment SL.No- twice 2843/ 15.1.14 Rs1000.00 Jagannath Mohapatra Dec’ 2013 235/33 Ist time at Sl no-61 Rs 1000.00
2nd time at Sl no-107 1618/ 21.9.13 Rs500.00 Sri Udaynath Aug’ 2013 284/39 1st time in Vr No-1618/21.9.13 & 2nd Rs 500.00 Mahasuar time vide vr no-1624/23.9.13 1875/ 21.10.13 Rs3083.00 Sri Harihar Spl reward for 1st time vide vr no-1875/ 21.10.13 & Rs 3083.00 Mohapatra Car festival-2013 2nd time vide Vr no- 1907/ 22.10.13 sanctioned vide O.O.no-11297(400)/7.10.13 TOTAL Rs 4583.00 Hence, the local authority was requested to recover the above misappropriated amount from the Cashier Smt Sujata Mohaptra vide objection memo no. 123 dtd 16.04.15. But on reply has been received till close of audit.Hence , a sum of Rs 4583.00 need recovery from Smt Sujata Mohaptra cashier,failing which Smt.Janaki Karuna Devi Accountant and Sri Tripati Nanda Dash Dy Administrator (F) are found responsible for such loss.
11.14 - MIsappropriation of cash due to double payment OSO-285
Audit Ref:Cash book for the year 2013 – 14, Cash payment vouchers, and Acquittance roll of OAP & Senior Sevayat Pension.
While checking Old Age Pension paid & Senior Sevayat Pension vouchers w.r.t. acquittance roll and cash book it is noticed that the following payments are booked twice against the single payment to the beneficiaries.
Sl. No. Name of the Benificiary Month of payment Vr. No. / Dt. (1st Vr. No. /Dt. (2nd Amount (in Rs.) payment) payment) 1 Kunjalata Mohapatra Dec’13 2840/ 15.01.2014 3476/25.03.2014 500.00 2 Krushna Ch. Mohapatra Nov’13 3483(A)/26.03.2014 3516/29.03.2014 1000.00 3 Padmanav Panda Aug’13 1625/23.09.2013 2945/25.01.2014 500.00 TOTAL 2000.00 In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority. Hence the Rs.2000.00 is suggested for recovery from Smt. Sujata Mohapatra, Cashierwho was responsible for such misappropriation of cash.
11.15 - Missappropreation of cash in shape of advance.
Ref- Vr. No.JV-348/18.1.14
While checking the above Journal voucher with reference to the cash book for the year 2013-14, it is found that Rs.4830/- has been adjusted against advance paid in Vr.No.36/ 8.4.11 and 3691/ 25.3.11 for Rs 10000.00. and Rs 7000/- respectively to Sri. Narasingha Mohapatra, Marketing Executive towards T.A expenses from 27.3.11 to 1.4.11. He had proceeded to New Delhi for
40 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Renewal of VAF Licence.But the remaining balance amounting to Rs. 12170/-.,which was not refunded till the date of exit conference as per the advance ledger.
As per Memo No. CS-II-9/2008 25485(255)/F Dated 17.05.2008 of the Finance Department , tour of a contractual employee should be approved by the competent authority.Since Sri Mohapatra is a contractual employee, the tour program and its tour performance should have been approved by the Competent Authority but the same is neither available in the adjustment voucher no-348/18.1.14 to audit nor produced during review.
Further it is not under stood why such a big amount of advance was sanctioned for performing tour for which the actual expenses comes to Rs 4830/-which has been adjusted vide-348/ 18.1.14 as against the advance of Rs.17000/- .
The adjustment of advance to the tune of Rs 4830.00 can not be admitted in audit in absence of train ticket which is the prove of his journey. In response to audit objection memo , the local authority has not replied yet, which is highly irregular and violating the Rule 14 and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule-1968.Hence the total advance amount of Rs 17000.00 which was neither adjusted within the one year nor refunded the cash even after issue of objection memo .Hence it is treated as a loss of Temple fund in disguise of advance and suggested for recovery from Sri Narasingha Mohapatra, Marketing Executive of Rs.17000.00 failing which Sri Tripati Nanda Dash Dy.Administrator (F) and Smt, Janaki Karuna Devi Accountant are held responsible for such misappropriation of cash in shape of non adjustment of advance.
PARA: 12 LOSS OF STOCK & STORE
12.1 - Loss of stock and stores of kothabhoga showing less entry in stock(OSP161to164)
On checking of the Stock register of kothabhoga for the year 12-13 and 13-14, it came to the notice that a total quantity of 431.200 kg of sugar and wheat was shown deducted from the stock towards weight of empty gunny bags amounting to Rs.13484.00 . The same deduction is not admitted in audit on the basis of following points .
i. It is revealed from the purchase bills that always sugar and wheat is purchased on net weight. Purchase of one quintal means the payment is made for 100 kg and weight of sugar bag is 101 Kg in gross.
ii. It was seen from the stock entry register that 1 kg and 500 gm of sugar have been shown deducted on each stock entry of one quintal bag and 50 Kg bag respectively towards weight of empty bag.
In this regard, the net weight printed in the bag needs to be taken in to account of stock. and the objected amount of Rs.13484.00 is detailed in following table.
Sugar for the year 12-13&13-14
Sl. No Date- Page No. Quantity deducted 1 02.04.12 159 3 Kg. 2. 29.04.12 159 3 Kg. 3. 29.04.12 159 3Kg. 4. 02.05.12 161 12 Kg 5. 02.06.12 163 9 Kg. 6. 10.06.12 163 3 Kg. 7. 22.06.12 163 3 Kg. 8. 15.07.12 165 8 Kg. 9. 14.08.12 167 3 Kg. 10. 03.08.12 167 8 Kg. 11. 03.09.12 169 6 Kg. 12. 22.9.12 169 8 Kg. 13. 22.10.12 171 8 Kg. 14. 07.12.12 175 3 Kg. 15. 04.01.13 177 4 Kg. 16. 20.01.13 177 15 Kg. 17. 21.03.13 181 8 Kg.
41 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
18. 21.03.&13 181 6 Kg. 19. 13.04.13 132 3 Kg. 20. 04.06.13 136 17Kg. 21 05.07.13 138 18Kg. 22 13.07.13 138 4Kg. 23. 02.08.13 140 8 Kg. 24. 20.09.13 142 2 Kg. 25 20.10.13 144 5 Kg. 26. 19.11.13 146 8 Kg. 27. 25.12.13 148 8 Kg. 28. 23.01.14 150 3.2 Kg. 29. 20.02.14 152 8 Kg. Total 197.200 kg.
Total Sugar deducted inRate per Kg. Total Amount needs the year 2012-2013 and recovery. 2013-2014 41.60 Rs.8203.52 or say Rs. 8204.00 197.200 kg. Wheat for the year 2012-2013 and 2013-14
Sl. No. Date- Page No. Quantity 1. 4/12 185 14Kg. 2. 5/12 187 9 Kg. 3. 6/12 189 10Kg. 4. 7/12 191 9 Kg. 5. 8/12 193 9 Kg. 6. 9/12 195 9 Kg. 7. 10/12 197 9 Kg. 8. 11/12 199 9 Kg. 9. 12/12 201 9 Kg. 10. 1/13 203 9 Kg. 11. 2/13 205 9 Kg. 12 3/13 207 9Kg. 13. 3/13 197 9 Kg. 14. 5/13 199 13 kg. 15. 6/13 201 10 Kg. 16. 7/13 203 19 Kg. 17. 8/13 205 5 kg. 18. 9/13 207 9 Kg. 19. 10/13 209 9 Kg. 20. 11/13 211 9 Kg. 21. 12/13 213 9 Kg. 22. 1/14 215 9 kg. 23. 2/14 217 9 Kg. 24. 3/14 219 9 Kg. Total 233 kg.
Total Wheat deductedRate per Kg. Total amount needs during the year 2012-2013 recovery. and 2013-14 233 kg. Rs.5279.78 or say Rs.5280.00 Rs.22.66
Total quantity of Wheat & Sugar deducted Total amount needs recovery. 431.200kg. Rs.13484.00 On issue of audit objection memo, no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violates Rule 14 & 15 of Shree Jagannath Temple Audit Rules, 1968. Hence the objection stands on its own merit and Rs 13484.00 needs recovery from Sri Taluchha Basudev Mohapatra, LDC (Retd.).Failing which Sri Debi Prasad Panda ,O.A.S.(Adm-Niti) &Sri Prasanna Ku Hota (Adm-Niti) held responsible.
42 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
12.2 - Less exibition of stock and stores in respect of kothabhog at the time of hand over of the charge(OSP165)
On checking of Kothabhog Stock Register with reference to relevant records it was noticed that on 28.02.2014 Sri Taluchha Basudev Mohapatra,L.D.C. handed over the charge to Sri Bhabani Prasad Mishra , L.D.C. The quantity of stock handed over did not tally with the stock taken over. The differences are as follows:
Sl Items Quantity Stock Quantity Stock Total Quantity Rate Total amounts needs handed over Register taken over register Difference per Kg Recovery No Page page 1 Guda 1766.409K.g 126 58.213K.g 127 1708.196 kg. Rs.43.5 Rs.74409.00 6 However, less quantity 1708.196 kg of Guda taken to the stock register amounting Rs.74409.00 needs recovery from Sri Bhabani prasad Mishra . L.D .C.In this score audit objection memo issued ,but no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violates Rule 14 & 15 of Shree Jagannath Temple Audit Rules, 1968. Hence the objection stands on its own merit and Rs 74409.00 needs recovery from Sri Bhabani prasad Mishra. L.D .C.Failing which Sri Prasanna Ku Hota (Adm-Niti) are held responsible.
12.3 - Loss of stock and stores of kothabhoga due to inadmissible issue.OSP 166)
While checking Kothabhoga stock register with reference to Daily issue register &related files, it came to the notice that, 202.860 Kg Ghee was issued towards Rosha Homa on 28 .2.14. From the stock issue register regarding issue of Ghee on 28.2.14 for the period from 22.3.06 to 28 .2.10 i.e.back log period was not supported by any official document like any file order, any acknowledgement of recipient . Hence the payment has no merits of consideration and treated as inadmissible payment and thus the cost of ghee amounting to Rs.60858.00 needs recovery.
Date of issue Quantity Purpose of issue. Rate per Kg Total amount need s recovery issued 28.2.14 202.860 Rosa Homa Ghee 300.00 Rs.60858.00 On issue of audit objection memo, no reply is furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violates Rule 14 & 15 of Shree Jagannath Temple Audit Rules, 1968. Hence the objection stands on its own merit and Rs 60858.00 needs recovery from SriTalucha Basudev Mohapatra. L.D .C (Retd)..Failing which Sri Prasanna Ku Hota (Adm-Niti) is held responsible.
12.4 - -Excess issue of Kothabhoga materials Violating Office Order.(OSP167)
On scrutiny of the Daily Kotha Bhoga Expenditure Register with reference to stock register & relating Files of 13-14 it was ascertained that, excess quantity of Kothabhoga materials were shown issued violating the Office Orders as stated in the following table . The details of which are given below .
Sl No. Order no & Name of items Quantity Quantity Daily issue Excess quantity Rate per Kg Total amount date actually to be issued register page no issued needs issued as per violating recovery
43 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Orders Orders 1 6894/ 13.6.13 Til oil Sudhasuar 34.848Kg 38.016Kg 178&294 3.168 234.26 742.13
Kg 2 151/ 20.6.13 Akadashi Ghee 65Kg 70Kg 192 5Kg 300.00 1500.00 3 7151/ 20.6.13 PhulirilagiTil oil 160 Kg 182.050Kg 192 22.050Kg 234.26 5165.43 4 10712/ 2.9.13 Jayadurga 6Kg 109.000Kg 20.10.13 45Kg 34.10 (chunaChaula) 1534.50
TOTAL 8942.06 or say 8942.00 However from the above fact it is clear that a sum of Rs.8942.00 was spent violating office order which needs recovery from SriTalucha Basudev Mohapatra. L.DC Retd.
On issue of audit objection memo, no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violates Rule 14 &15 of Shree Jagannath Temple Audit Rules, 1968. Hence the objection stands on its own merit andRs 8942.00 needs recovery from SriTalucha Basudev Mohapatra. L.D .C (Retd) ..Failing which Sri Debi Prasad Panda ,O.A.S.(Adm-Niti) &Sri Prasanna Ku Hota (Adm-Niti)are held responsible.
12.5 - Excess issue of Kothabhoga materials Violating OfficeOrder.(OSP168)
On scrutiny of the Daily KothaBhoga Expenditure register with reference to stock register & relating Files it was disclosed that as per Order no 13860/7.9.11 the following items and quantity were approved to be issued regularly for Nabagraha puja .
Name of the items Quantity Atta 1.5 Kg. Ghee 500 Gram Guda 500 Gram But w.e.f.01.04.12 in addition to the above mentioned materials extra 100 gm of sugar was issued daily for Nabagrahapuja during the year 12-13 &13-14 without any supporting Office Order. In absence of Office Order, the issue of sugar is not admitted in audit & the objected amount of Rs.3037.00 needs recovery from the person concerned .The details of sugar issued is given below.
1.4.12 to 31.3.13 365days 100Gm 36.500 gm
1.4.13 to 31.3.14 365 days 100Gm 36.500 gm
Total 73.000 gm
Total issue Rate per Kg Total amount needs Recovery 73.000 gm of Sugar 41.60 Rs.3036.80 TOTAL Rs.3036.80 or say Rs.3037.00 On issue of audit objection memo, no reply is furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violates Rule 14 & 15 of Shree Jagannath Temple Audit Rules, 1968. Hence the objection stands on its own merit andRs 3037.00 needs recovery from SriTalucha Basudev Mohapatra. L.D .C (Retd). .Failing which Sri Debi Prasad Panda ,O.A.S.(Adm-Niti) &Sri Prasanna Ku Hota (Adm-Niti) held responsible.
12.6 - Loss of Stock & Store due to less stock taken to the Stock Register (Kothabhoga) OSP-104
While checking Bank Vouchers for the year 13 – 14 with reference to Stock Register of Kothabhoga for the year 2012 – 13 & 2013 – 14 it is found that 6 quintals of Gota Biri was purchased @ Rs. 4970.00 per quintal with other grocery items vide Vr. No. 58 dtd 20.04.13. But stock entry made for Gota Biri at Page No. 103 of Stock Register 12 – 13 is 5 quintals, resulting a loss of stock of one quintal of Gota Biri amounting to Rs 5115.00 as calculated below:
44 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Rate of 1 quintal Rs 4970.00
(-) 2% less Rs 99.00
(+) 5% VAT Rs 244.00
Total Rs 5115.00
The reasons of less stock entry was called for through audit objection memo No-68 but no reply was furnished by the local authrity till close of the audit .Hence objection stands on its own merit and it was treated as a loss to the institution.The above said loss amounting to Rs.5115.00 needs recovery from Sri Taluchha Basudev Mahapatra,UDC, who was incharge of stock at that time & compliance intimated to the audit..Failing which Sri Debi Prasad Panda ,O.A.S.(Adm-Niti) is held responsible.
12.7 - Excess issue of Ghee for Nabagraha Puja from 18.12.11 to 31.03.14 & Extra issue of Sugar from 0 1.04.12 to 31.03.14 (OSP_-112)
On scrutiny of Kothabhoga daily issue register w.r.t. files it was noticed that as per order no. 13860 dtd 07.09.11 the following items with quantity was approved to be issued for Nabagraha puja.
Name of the Item Quantity Atta 1.5 kg Ghee 0.5 kg Guda 0.5 kg But from 18.12.11, 0.8 kg of ghee has been issued instead of 0.5 kg to Kothabhoga Jogania upto end of this audit i.e., 31.03.14 resulting in an excess issue of 250.2 kg of ghee which amounts to Rs. 77562.00 (@ Rs. 310.00 per kg). The details of calculation is given below:
Period No. of days Excess issue of ghee (in Kg) Amount (in Rs.) 18.12.11 to 31.12.11 14 4.2 1302.00 01.01.12 to 31.03.12 90 27 8370.00 01.04.12 to 31.03.13 365 109.5 33945.00 01.04.13 to 31.03.14 365 109.5 33945.00 Total 834 250.2 77562.00 The excess issue of ghee amounting to Rs. 77562.00 needs recovery from the person concerned and compliance reported to audit as soon as possible.
On issue of audit objection memo, no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violates Rule 14 & 15 of Shree Jagannath Temple Audit Rules, 1968. Hence the objection stands on its own merit and Rs77562.00 needs recovery from Sri Talucha Basudev Mohapatra. L.D .C (Retd)..Failing which Sri Debi Prasad Panda ,O.A.S.(Adm-Niti) &Sri Prasanna Ku Hota (Adm-Niti) held responsible.
12.8 - Loss of cost of Ghee due to balancing mistake during the month of Aug’ 2013 ( OSP_113)
On checking the balancing of Kothabhoga daily issue register for the month of Aug’ 2013, it was noticed that 4.525 kg of ghee shown less in closing balance I.e., on 31.08.13. Due to balancing mistake , a loss of stock is caused to the tune of Rs. 1403.00 (@ Rs. 310.00 per Kg.The detail of stock position is given below:
Actual total;- 1149.537 k.g
Total shown:- 1145.012 k.g
Difference:- 4.525 k.g
On issue of audit objection memo, no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violates Rule 14 & 15 of Shree Jagannath Temple Audit Rules, 1968. Hence, the objection stands on its own merit and Rs1403.00 needs recovery from Sri Talucha Basudev Mohapatra. L.D .C (Retd)..Failing which Sri Prasanna Ku Hota (Adm-Niti) held responsible.
45 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
12.9 - Excess issue of Kothabhoga Materials(OSP 200)
On scrutiny of daily stock register w.r.t Parva yatra register it was disclosed that excess quantity of Kothabhog materials was shown issued as against the quantity specified in parva Yatra register for festival, during 12-13 &13-14 .The details of which is furnished below,
Date of issue of Page 37of parva yatra Daily Expenditure register Excess paid Rate per K.G Total Excess amount materials register paid Anasar Pana Chini 2.756 per day x14 7.756x14=108.584 70k.g 41.60 2912.00 5.6.12. to 18.6.12 days=38.584k.g Anasar pana Chini 2.756 per day x 14 days 7.756x14=108.584 70k.g 41.60 2912.00 24.6.13 to 7.7.13 =38.584k.g TOTAL
5824.00
On issue of audit objection memo, no reply is furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violates Rule 14 & 15 of Shree Jagannath Temple Audit Rules, 1968. Hence the objection stands on its own merit and Rs5824.00 needs recovery from Sri Talucha Basudev Mohapatra. L.D .C (Retd)..Failing which Sri Debi Prasad Panda ,O.A.S.(Adm-Niti) held responsible..
12.10 - Excess issue of Kothabhoga Materials (OSP 201,203)
While Checking Daily issue register it was noticed that on 21.2.14, 23 Kg of ghee was issued to Sebak palia , on 29.3.13, 60 Kg of Til oil to Bhogamandap & 1077.040 k.g of sugar during 2012-13 &13-14 were issued, against which neither any sanction order nor any acknowledgement was produced before Audit for verification.
In absence of the above, issues of ghee , Til oil & sugar can not be admitted in Audit & cost of ghee , Til oil & sugar amounting to Rs64125.79 needs recovery from person concerned who is responsible .Detailes are given below ,
Date Purpose of payment Name of items Quantity issued Rate per K.g Total amount 29.3.13 Bhogamandap Til oil 60.000Kg 234.00 14040.00 21.2.14 Sebak palia Ghee 23.000Kg 300.00 6900.00 21.06.2012 Ratha Koraku Chini Sugar 450k.g 41.60 18720.00
12.07.2012 -do- Sugar 88.120 k.g 41.60 3665.79 08.07.2013 -do- sugar 200k.g 41.60 8320.00 13.07.2013 -do- sugar 300 k.g 41.60 12480.00 Total 64125.79 On issue of audit objection memo, no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violates Rule 14 & 15 of Shree Jagannath Temple Audit Rules, 1968. Hence the objection stands on its own merit andRs 64125.79 needs recovery from Sri Talucha Basudev Mohapatra. L.D C. (Retd).Failing which Sri Debi Prasad Panda ,O.A.S.(Adm-Niti) &Sri Prasanna Ku Hota (Adm-Niti) held responsib
12.11 - Excess issue of Kothabhoga Materials (OSP 202)
While checking Daily Kothabhoga issue register it was found that during the year 2012-13, 47.400 Kg of ghee & 709.000 Kg of sugar was issued to Daitapati Nijog. As seen from the order No 8786/31.5.12 only 23.200gm ghee & 268 Kg sugar was sanctioned to be issued to Daitapati Nijog for Anasar. But out of the total issued quantity, sanction order for 24.200 Kg of ghee and 441.000 Kg of sugar could not be found. Details are tabled below.
46 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Kothabhoga materials issued to Daitapati
Date Quantity of ghee Issued Saction order no &date Rate per Kg of ghee Total amount 1.9.12 6.800 nil 300.00 2040.00 9.6.12 8.400 nil 300.00 2520.00 10.6.12 9.000 nil 300.00 2700.00 TOTAL 24.200 7260.00
Date Quantity of Sugar Saction order no &date Rate per Kg of Sugar Total amount issued 1.9.12 100.500 nil 41.60 4180.80 9.6.12 90.000 nil 41.60 3744.00 10.6.12 113.500 nil 41.60 4721.60 1.8.12 137.000 9106(3)14.6.11 41.60 5699.20 Already paid on 2.7.11 618.000K.g TOTAL 441.000 18345.60 On issue of audit objection memo, no reply is furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violates Rule 14 & 15 of Shree Jagannath Temple Audit Rules, 1968. Hence the objection stands on its own merit and Rs18345.00 needs recovery from Sri Talucha Basudev Mohapatra. L.D .C (Retd)..Failing which Sri Debi Prasad Panda ,O.A.S.(Adm-Niti) held responsible.
12.12 - Loss of Stock & Stores of Nilachal Bhakta NiwasOSP-191
Audit Reference:- Nilachal Bhakta Niwas
On checking of the Vr No- 419/dt27.8.12 w.r.t. stock register of Nilachala Bhakta Niwas and yatri Niwas, it was seen that a sum of Rs 2,64,360.00 has been spent towards purchase of different kinds of materials for use in dormitory as against the bill no-4788/dt18.6.12 from Parikshit Agancy. While checking the stock entry of each item it was found that 40 nos of kurcon Matters @cost of 3674.00 per matters,total cost come to Rs 1, 46,960.00 at page no-22 has not been found.
In response to audit objection memo the local authority has replied that stock position has been produced to audit ,But practically the said stock position has not been verified by audit nor the physical verification certificate as required under OGFR rule 111 vol -1 has been attached with the stock register for the year 12-13 and 13-14.Hence,a sum of Rs 1, 46, 960.00 has been treated as loss of stock which is suggested for recovery from Sri Bimal Kumar Kamala,UDC,Genral Misc. section and Sri Saroj Ku Ray,Asst.Administrator are considered as responsible.
12.13 - Loss of stock of CFL bulbOSP -248
While checking the Bank voucher for the year 13-14 it is seen that electrical goods purchased for Rs 34246.00 vide voucher no-1235/11.3.14.In this voucher 20 nos of 18 watt CFL bulb have been purchased vide bill no- 1223 dtd 17.02.2014 in sl.no-3. The material also entered in the stock register page no-217 .While scrutinizing the stock register it has come to the notice that 18 Nos of CFL bulb have been entered in the stock register instead of 20 Nos which resulted a loss of stock of 2 nos of CFL bulb amounting to Rs 330.00 (= Rs 146.53 x 2 + 13.5% VAT). In this regard objection memo has been issued for clarification.In response to memo no reply has been furnished by the local authority.Hence Rs 330.00 needs recovery from Sri Sarat Ch. Maharana who is responsible for the above said loss.
12.14 - Loss of Stock of Gold & Silver OSP – 94
While checking the Gold and Silver Stock register w.r.t. Donation Receipt books received by Nazir section during the year 2012 – 13 and 2013 – 14 it was found that gold and silver ornaments and old silver coins were received by the local authority either as direct donation or from donation boxes. But stock entry of 44.87g of gold and 3291g of silver, detail of which is given below, could not be found from the respective stock registers of gold and silver. Hence the local authority was requested to clarify to audit the reason of such non-credit of the below mentioned particulars vide memo no. 64 dtd 22.12.14. But in response, no reply has been received from the local authority. In absence of any
47 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
reply it is treated as a loss of stock to the institution and the amounts of Rs 112175.00 & Rs 115185.00 i.e.rs227360.00 in total in lieu of such loss was suggested for recovery from the person(s) responsible.
Details of 44.87g of Gold
DR Book No. DR No. & Date Particulars Cost of Gold @ Rs2500.00 per Remark gram 1360 67956 dtd One gold nose pin of 0.150 g Rs 375.00 Taken to new stock register 01.05.2012 (2015-16)Pg-82 1360 67980 dtd One gold chita of 1.070g Rs 2675.00 Taken to new stock register 24.05.2012 (2015-16)Pg-101 1429 71429 dtd One gold Kiriti of 41.300g Rs 103250.00 Taken to new stock register 18.08.2012 (2015-16)Pg-91 1897 94816 dtd One gold chita of 0.450g Rs 1125.00 Taken to new stock register 03.12.2013 (2015-16)Pg-91 1897 94836 dtd Two nos of gold paunji of 1.900g Rs 4750.00 Taken to new stock register 23.12.2013 (2015-16)Pg-91 Total 44.87g Rs 112175.00
Details of 3291g of Silver
DR Book No. DR No. & Date Particulars Cost of Silver @ Rs35.00 per Remark gram 1303 65138 dtd Silver Munda Coin 8 nos. (1908,1913,1912 (3), 1917 (2), 1919) i.e. of Rs 2800.00 Taken to new stock register 11.04.2012 80g (2015-16)Pg-82 1360 67954 dtd One Silver Thali of 668 g Rs 23380.00 Taken to Lagi register Pg-47 01.05.2012 1478 73887 dtd One silver mudra (Chira 1918) and one Laxmi Ganesh Adhuli i.e. of Rs 525.00 Taken to new silver stock register 26.10.2012 15g (2015-16)Pg-22 1802 90085 dtd One Silver Thali, one silver glass and one glass cover of 1 Kg 725 g Rs 60375.00 Taken to Lagi register Pg-107 21.10.2013 1995 99704 dtd Three nos of Silver sankha bauti of 803.000g Rs 28105.00 Taken to Lagi register Pg-119 24.01.2014 Total 3291g Rs 115185.00 During exit conference Garad Stock register & Lagi registers are produced by the local authority which are also verified(on 01.08.2015) & found there is no loss of stock .Hence objection para was dropped.
12.15 - Loss of stock of liveries (OSP 50)
On checking voucher no. 94 dtd 05.05.2012 it was found that 125 nos of rain coat (pant and shirt) were purchased from M/s Vishal Garments, Puri amounting to Rs. 68750/- which was taken in liveries stock register of 2011 – 12 as new stock as on 31.09.11 vide page no. 13. But on verification of the old stock register it was found that balance stock of 1 rain coat as on 31.08.2010 (as per page no. 16 of liveries stock register for 2010 – 11) had not been taken as B.F. in the liveries stock register of 2011 – 12 which resulted loss of stock of 1 no. of liveries cost of Rs. 550/-.
In response to the audit objection memo, the local authority has recovered Rs 550.00 from Sri Subash Ch. Rath, UDC and deposited the sum vide MR no. 435 dtd 29.04.15and verified w.r.t.Cash Book Vol-I page no-96.Sri Subash Ch. Rath, UDC was responsible for such loss of stock and store.
12.16 - Less collection of Library Information Centre, BBSR(OSP-74)
While checking the out publication stock register of Bhubaneswar information center it is observed that there is error in balancing the stock of different type of photo(12"*16") as follows
Date O.B Sale C.B shown Less shown in C.B Cash memo no. 25.12.2013 174 1 171 2 38860 The price of the above mentioned photo is Rs10 each. So there has been a loss of Rs 20 to the Shree Jagannath Temple administration due to
48 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
less shown of closing balance in the stock register of Bhubaneswar information center. Hence it is suggested for recovery Rs 20.00 from Sri Chita Mohapatra Store in charge and compliance be reported before the audit.
12.17 - Loss of stock on Sandal woodOSP-90
(1) On verification of the Sandal wood Stock Register w.r.t Lagi Register for the year 12-13, it was found that 4kg of ( Gunda) Sandal wood was issued to Sri Rabi Narayan Mishra Temple Commander (for the purpose of Dhupa) on 16.12.12 as per Office Order No. XII-09/12-19408/16.12.12 . Accordingly the balance was deducted (17.827 - 4 =13.827 kg) from the Sandal wood stock of Selam. But the deduction has been done twice, which shows on Page 27 of the stock register, where the balance was deducted again (13.827- 4.000+.250=9.577) from the balance as on 31.3.13, which resulted in the loss of 4kg of Sandal wood amounting to Rs 27936.00 @ Rs 6984 per kg.
On issue of objection memo no.-60/18.12.14 ,the local authority had admitted the double issue of Sandal wood of 4kg but had explained that it was a clerical error and that the stock position was intact on physical verification. The audit is not convinced with their explanation since there has been no evidence of physical verification to have occurred at all in the years 12-13 and 13-14 (which is a violation of Rule 111 of OGFR Vol.1, according to which half-yearly physical verification of the stock position must be conducted every financial year) as the audit has not seen a certificate of physical verification of these two years. Hence, a sum of Rs 27936.00 is suggested for recovery from Sri Rabi Narayan Pujapanda, Nazir and Sri Rabi Narayan Das, OIC, Niti who are considered as responsible for such loss of stock.
2) Further, upon the verification of the sandal wood stock Register, it was found on Page 120 that 238.350kg of powder sandal was kept in the stock for the purpose of Dhupa but the same was left unused for two years due to the inattention and apathy of the local authority due to which the quality of the item has degraded. This has resulted in a loss of chandan stock worth Rs 8, 32,318.00 @ 50% cost of sandalwood i.e. Rs 3,492.00.
(3) Further, it was noticed on Page 25 of the Stock Register for year 12-13 that 1.600 kg of sandalwood had been received as donation on date 12 .3.13 vide D.R.No-79773 dt 12.3.13. But the same was neither taken to the stock balance nor shown as issue to sebayat during the year under audit which causes loss of stock of 1.600 kg amounting to Rs.11175.00 – which is suggested for recovery from Sri Rabi Narayan Pujapanda,Nazir and compliance to be reported to audit .
During Exit conference No 1 is complied as clerical error which is rectified by them and amount of Rs. 27936.00 is dropped
(In total amount of Rs 843988.00 (Rs 8, 32,318.00 + Rs.11175.00) is suggested for recovery from Sri Rabi Narayan Pujapanda,Nazir andSri Rabi Narayan Das, OIC, Niti those are consider as responsible.
12.18 - Loss of Stock of Sandle WoodOSP_-91)
On checking of the stock register of sandal wood wrt Lagi Register for the year 13-14, it is seen that opening balance as on 1.4.13 of salem sandal wood stock was kg9.577gr. Out of which 2.340gr was deducted towards issue to P Ghatuary on dated 3.4.13 and balance shown as 7.037 which actually comes to 7.237 and mentioned that said less 0.200 gr stock is taken at page32. But the same is not added to the balance stock which resulted loss of 0.200gr sandal wood and the cost of which comes to Rs.1397.00 at the purchase rate.
.In response to audit objection memo,the local authority remain silent.Hence a sum of Rs 1397.00 is suggested for recovery from .Sri Rabi Narayan Pujapanda, Nazir and Sri Rabi Narayan Das ,OIC, Niti those are considered as responsible for such loss of stock.
12.19 -
This para is deleted as being repeat of para 12.12
PARA: 13 AUDIT OF RECEIPTS
49 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
13.1 - Sources of Income of Shree Jagannath Temple Administration
Income of Shree Jagannath Temple Office consists of 5 no.s of categorized sources named 1. Land Revenue 2. Other Revenue 3. Temple Revenue 4. Grants 5. Deposits
1. Land Revenue consists of Rajbhag, sale proceeds from paddy & other crops, sale of coconuts, forest & orchards, quarries, Annuity P.A.P.O., certificate dues, collection from Bagha & Gopinathpur Docchian Farm, Land acquisition compensation, sale of lands, misc. revenue collection.
2. Other revenue includes Bajemahal, shop rent, sale of books, magazines, Sri Mandir Patrika and photos, general donations, Amruta Manohi donation, corpus fund, foundation fund, interest from savings account etc.
3. Temple revenue income consists of Pindika, Parimanik ticket collection, Dhwaja, Marble plaque fixation, Sradha, Sadhibandha, Lagi fees, Donation box, Bheta box, Hundi, Bhitara katha Darshani, Chanda dakhina, Parimanik collection during Rath Yatra, , Misc. collection, Court fees, Certificate dues and Khua manda collection.
4. Grants are sanctioned by govt. for different purposes like Administrative Grant, Festival Grant, Grants for Remuneration, Chairman’s Allowance, developmental project and corpus fund.
5. Deposits consist of security deposit, Korakh of prapya pauna and Khei of sevaks, CPF share of temple employees/ GPF fund, LIC of temple employees, loan recovery, Pension, Gratuity and Proffessional Tax.
The comments on receipts are given in foregoing paras.
13.2 - Sub- Non-production of d quarry permit Register& case records OSP 116 to 119 , 121 to 125 & 133.
Audit criteria:-The Odisha Miner Mineral Concession Rule,2004,
Chapter VII-Rule 61 (5) of The Orissa Minor Minerals Concession Rules,2004,every competent authority in case of decorative stone shall maintain Register of quarry lease in form E’. Form E’ requires the following datas namely_
1.Name and address of permit holder
2. Dt. Of application,
3. No. & dt. Of order of grant
4. Minerals,
5 . S.No.
6. Village/ Forest ranges,
7 . Tahasil,
8 . Quantity permitted,
9 . Details of royality received,
10 . Date of expiry of the permit,
11. Qntty. Removed
12 . Whether all dues have been recovered,
13 . Remark,
14 . Signature of officer.
The quarry permit Register produced before Audit for verification , does not contain all the information as noted above.The vital
50 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
information like quantity permitted, details of royalty received and quantity removed are not available in the aforesaid Register. The details of the refund of security deposits are not mentioned in the register.The Register bears no signature of the in-charge officer in support of the correctness of the data entered in that register. A consolidated data reflecting the active quarries of Lord Jagannath is attached in Annexture-5),i.e. prepared on the base of so maintained Quarry Permit Register produced to audit for verification and a data obtained from the computer section.. The local authority was requested to ensure the fact and figures in the data, which he did not responded till to the end of audit.As the correct data regarding the existence of quarries was not provided to Audit, the figure given by Audit regarding existence of quarries of 170 no.s as in Annexture-5 may be accepted as true.
It is noticed in the Quarry Permit Register that the quarries starting from sl. no.1 to 64 are active and their respective lease are operated during last four years.Audit tried to obtain the information regarding the present position of balance quarries, but failed to fetch the reply. The matter merits special investigation as the local authority is knowingly silent on the query.
Further,the leased quarry files involving scheduled collection amounting to Rs.27,78,01,131.00 during the years of audit as detailed in Annexture -6 were not produced during the audit period. On the day of exit conference, the local authority assured to produce the same records before Audit on 6.8.2015. On verification of the quarry case records laterally produced ,it came to notice that no copy of environment clearance certificate is attached any of the case records. Besides,some other irregularities as came to notice are mentioned below:-
1) The black granite stone quarry at Samantara Pur and the white granite quarry at Dangarapada are under suit. The temple administration could not produce during Audit verification of cases under suit.
2) The black granite stone quarry, Kalinga was leased from 4.12.12 to 31.12.13. First Extension of lease period was allowed from 1st Feb.14 to 31st March 14. For the 2nd time the lease period was allowed from 31st April and onward. In between 2 extended lease period, there is a gap of one month. The dealing Asst. failed to inform regarding the position of the quarry at the time of gap period as no events are recorded neither in case record nor in Lease Register.Hence ,the local authority is requested to keep every accounts of individual quarry d , so that the position of quarries can be watched and irregular extraction from the unleased quarry can be checked.
After verification of quarry records produced after Exit conference, the audit objection amounting to Rs 272801131.00 is dropped .
13.3 - Irregularities on the lease operation of quarries.OSP 120 to 136.
Audit Reference:-1) The Orissa Minor Minerals Concession Rules,2004,
2) The quarry permit register for the year from 2008-09 to 2014-15.
(1)Chapter V- Rule 31 of the OMMC Rule 2004 regarding Authority to grant permit shows that the competent authority may grant permit in Form-O for extraction and removal from the mining area not exceeding one thousand tones under any one permit on payment of dues such as surface rent, royalty and compensatory forestation fee in advance.It is seen that in no cases,the lease permit have been issued after obtaining the aforesaid fees in advance. In every executed sale deed,there is the schedule that the auction holder shall pay to the occupier of the surface of land just and reasonable compensation as may be agreed upon by the auction holder and owner of the land.The local authority has not taken any step to realize any surface rent as prescribed under Rule-24(1) and 28(1) subject to be increased by forty percent automatically w.e.f fourth year in case these rate is not revised after expiry of 3 years from the date of last fixation.In response Audit Objection Memo the local authority has stated that the competent authority is the Sub-Collector, Khordha and the surface rent is not yet paid by the temple administration.From the statement of the local authority it is known that he wants to avoid the matter by shifting responsibility on the Sub-Collector, Khurdha. As all the collections are being made at the level of the temple office, to hold the Sub-Collector responsible for non-collection of surface rent is not genuine.The temple administration is requested to follow the codal provision and not to allow the leakage of temple revenue hence forth.
2) As per Rule 32 of the OMMC Rule, The period of permit shall not exceed three months. But on verification of the produced case records as detailed in the following table, it is seen that the said Rule has been diverged.The local authority was requested through Audit Objection Memo to ensure the time period of lease permitted to different persons and to furnish suitable explanation in support of such deviation, In response, the authority has stated "The Temple Managing Committee in their meeting held on ..... have decided to auction the quarry for a period of one year in stead of 3 years. Accordingly, the quarries are auctioned for a period of one year." Again he had stated, "The quarries in question belong to Temple Administration. But,these quarries will not be put to auction by the temple administration,it will put to auction by the competent authority i.e. Sub-Collector, Khurdha. In this peculiar circumstances,it is not possible by the temple administration to follow/ observe all the guide lines issued by the Govt. relating to auction sale of quarries." From the aforesaid two statement, it is ascertained that the Temple Authority is by himself creating peculiar circumstances by putting two contradictory views. In order to maintain the transparency in the lease auction , the Sub-Collector , Khurdha is authorised to execute the tender formalities only.All the policy decision is at the control of the temple Administration.The reply of the authority proves that the OMMC Rules have been set casual by the temple administration and over and above the Rule, the arbitrary decision of the authority is reigned.
Case no. Mouza Tahasil Khata no Plot no. Area Period of lease permitted
51 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
14/13 Nijagadatapanga Khorda 832/1 276(p) 1.275 1.8.13 to 31.7.14
32/13 Chhatrama Khorda 401 1498(p) 8.115 1.8.13 to 31.7.14 1499(p)
17/13 Nijagadatapanga Khorda 832/1 277(p) 6 1.8.13 to 31.7.14
39/13 Narangada Khordha 532/2 1745(p) 7.02 1.8.13 to 31.7.14
40/13 Radhakantapur Khordha 255 421(p) 1 21.12.13 to 31.3.14
001/14 Jhinkijhari Khordha 557/1 142 10.22 Aug.13 to March 14
16/13 Nijagadatapanga Khordha 823/1 276(p) 277(p) 2.6 1.8.13 to 31.7.14
30/13 Narasinghaprasad Khorda 383 9(p) 2.3 1.8.13 to 31.7.14
23/13 Dangarapada Khorda 271/1 1246(p) 2.1 1.8.13 to 31.8.14
35/13 Kiajhari Khorda 320 755(p) 1 1.8.23 to 31.7.14
002/13 Kaipadar Khorda 937/1 2907 24.63 1.8.13 to 31.7.14
28/13 Malipada Khorda 733 9(p) 1 1.8.13 o 31.7.14
3) Rule 31 says that extraction and removal from the mining area exceeding one thousand tones under any one permit is a wrongful act and Rule 33 – (1) shows that the depth of the quarry bellow the surface level shall not exceed six meters. Further Rule 33-(11) shows that If any miner mineral is removed in excess of the quantity permitted, such material shall be confiscated and the permit holder shall be liable for punishment under the provision of the Indian Penal Code .In each lease deed, there is also the instruction in a schedule that the auction holder shall keep correct monthly accounts of miner mineral quarried and dispatched and furnish a monthly return in Form “Y” to the competent authority by 15th of succeeding month. He shall furnish an annual return in Form “Z” to the competent authority and the Director of Mines, Odisha for the financial year or part there of within a week of the close of the financial year or expiry of the term of the auction. Again , Rule 33 (12) says that as soon as removal of the mineral granted under this permit is completed, the permit holder shall surrender the permit to the competent authority and furnish to him particulars of permit in FORM-U indicating the quantities of minor minerals removed and other information.There are so many provision to check and control the activities of auction holder in pen and paper,but practically on verification of produced case records,it is seen that the local authority has not taken any steps to check the accounts of production and dispatch of the quarried mineral as there is no record in support of it is available anywhere.The auction holders are just liberated to extract the mineral as much as they can and carry out it . The local authority paid no interest to defend against the allegation raised by the Audit.In response to the Objection Memo,the authority put the answer,"The point raised in this para can not be adhered to as there is no technical person/mining expert in Temple Administration." The answer of the authority is not convincing .Where there are the institutes of geological survey present in the state, the temple authority have every scope to invite them as outsourcing to measure and check measure the minerals before and after the lease of quarries.In stead of accepting the remedial measures to choke the free extraction of minerals, the local authority is trying to suppress the matter by allowing the miscreants' operation.
4) In each executed lease deed, there are scheduled that the auction holders undertake to make delivery of vacant possession of the quarry on the day after the license is expired.Any possession there after shall be deemed to be that of a tress passer entitling the 1st party to realize compensation and forfeit the security deposit and to levy damage cost double the amount of daily license fee till actual delivery is affected .As no mention are there in any case record regarding the date of delivery of the vacant possession ,Audit could not ascertain the amount of damage cost if any have been realized by the local authority or not.The authority was requested to produce the authentic documents showing dates of delivery of vacant possession of quarries by the auction holders,which he did not till to the end of audit..Instead, in response to Objection Memo the authority put answer by saying "Soon after lease period is over the temple administration the temple Administration have taken steps in a war footing manner to auction the quarry for the next financial year. Immediate suitable steps are being taken by the temple Administration to take back the possession of the quarry in respect of which the lease period is over. So there is no possibilities of more extraction of minerals from the
52 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
said quarries." At first ,the temple authority has admitted that he has no control over the quantity of mineral extracted as he has no technical person in his possession to check it. Secondly, no documentary evidence are there supporting the surrender of quarry by the lease holder after the lease period is over, thirdly frequently the broadcasting medias as well as the Pollution Control Board are focusing the irregular extraction of minerals from the quarries. In such a situation ,the temple authority is advice to take immediate and effective steps to extract more mineral from different quarry to increase their land revenue.
5) In the advertisement for auction of quarry lease,there is the instruction for the successful bidder to deposit the lease amount at a time in a single installment. It is seen that maximum lease holders have paid their lease amount in more than one installment.Not only the lease amount but also the amount meant for T.C.S. and I.S.D. have been deposited in installments. A single example,the claim deposit of Sri Bhalu Swain, the auction holder of the quarry Jhinkijhari,khorda vide case record No.01/14 may be observed below. The local authority is advised to follow the codal provision strictly and not to be so liberal to the inhabitant lease holder of local area.The authority in response has assured that after the amendment of OMMC Rules, no installment was allowed. The bidders are depositing the TCS & ISD amount in one installment.
T.C.S. 2602/8.8.13 212000
2929/29.8.13 21000 I.S.D. 2603/8.8.13 40000 2230/29.8.13 1125000 Lease 2477/3.8.13 5480000 amount
2804/8.8.13 5120000 2928/29.8.13 1050000 6) The data in attached Annexture-( 7 ) shows the position of active quarries from the year 2010-11 to 2013-14. The information given in the table are prepared on the base of lease permit Register i.e.produced before Audit for verification. The information regarding the position of the quarries not in lease during the years as mentioned in column 7,8,9 & 10 was required through Audit Objection Memo.The local authority stated that no tender paper had been received in respect of the quarries not in lease.Then fresh advertisement had been made for these quarries. But a copy of such fresh advertisement was not provided to Audit to review the fact..
7) Further, the scheduled income position out of quarries leased during the years enumerated from the quarry permit Register from the year 2010-11 to 2013-14 is stated in Annexture -7) and the abstract is stated bellow, in which no consistency of income during the years is observed. Specially the income during the year 2013-14 has been declined below the fair level in comparison to that of the year 2011-12 & 2012-13. The remark of the local authority was invited through Audit objection memo to ascertain the actual inconveniences. But, unfortunately no remark from his side could be obtained till to the end of audit.. From the table furnished below it is found that income position of quarry decreased day by day instead of increasing .Hence , audit is suggesting to take effective steps to improve the Land Revenue from quarries basing on the views of audit .
2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 5,73,66,656 20,81,79,051 17,64,81,903 9,85,57,497 8) The statement given in Annexture -8 has been prepared taking 25 no.s of the case records and the Lease Permit Register produced before Audit for verification. Between two lease periods of a quarry, there are noticed some gap period as mentioned under column 10.The position of the quarries in the interval period was not recorded any where. In response to the Objection Memo the local authority stated,"When the new policy has been introduced as per orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India,the time gap was taken to short out the problems by the Temple Administration. So there was delay in deciding the policy/procedure to be adopted by the Temple Administration." As no copy of the order of the Supreme Court and no survey report were provided supporting the statement of the local authority, Audit could not able to focus on the fact. It is only presumed that due to lack of proper management, the quarries in interval periods are being let at the hands of local inhabitants to deal with the quarry products recklessly and the revenue in crore are being dropped there by.
On consideration of the reply of the local authority at the time of exit conference it is suggested to the to take effective steps in the above stated matters so that the revenue collection of the Temple will be enhanced.
13.4 - Inadmissible deposit of 25 percent of lease amount to Odisha Environment Management Fund Trust, BBSR and irregular refund of security amount collected from successful auction holders of quarries in Khordha district OSP137-139.
Audit reference:-1) Letter No.53276/dt.10.12.12 and Letter No.35996/ dt.20.9.13 of Govt. of Odisha, Revenue and Disaster Management.
2) The Orissa Minor Minerals Concession Rules,2004.
3) The Home Ministry Report published on Thurs Day April 19 2007.
53 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
(A) Schedule 5 of the Letter No.53276/dt.10.12.12 indicates that for implementation of Environment Management plan/ environmental restoration measures in case of minor mineral leases up to 5 hectare, 25% of the auction bid amount, royalty and surface rent paid or payable from the miner mineral extracted or to be extracted should be collected to be deposited with the Environment Management Trust Fund. The same view of the Govt. has not been altered, rather it is clarified vide Letter No.35996/ dt.20.9.13 that the contribution equal to 25% of bid amount, royalty and surface rent is over and above the auction value and to contribute it is the sole responsibility of the lease Holder. In this concern it is to mention that the temple Administration has deposited an amount of Rs.68,47,488.00 to Odisha Environment Management Fund Trust during the year 2013-14,which is drawn out of the bid amounts as detailed in following table, not over and above the bid amount. The reply of the authority in response to the Audit Objection Memo is not convincing. In reply he has stated that there is no specific instruction of the Govt. to obtain 25% of bid amount for payment by extracting from the bid amount or from the claim made over and above the bid amount .If the temple authority was in doubt that whether they have to collect 100% of the bid amount and remit 25% to the Environment Management out of the 100% or extra 25% of the auction bid amount over and above the bid amount ,they should ascertain the clarification from the Revenue Deptt. much prior to the release of such fund . Following the customary practice pertained in the temple office, the authority without any realization of such due from the bid holder, has let it to go out of the temple fund . What ever the cause may be,the release of such fund is definitely loss to the temple office. The person concerned starting from the Asst., who prepared the bill, to the authorities who checked the authenticity and passed for payment are responsible for such loss.
Paid to Odisha Environment Management Fund Trust towards 25% of lease amount for environment clearance
Voucher No. Date Debit amount Name of the quarry Khata No. Plot No. Bid amount 2544.6.13 5000Kiajhari white stone 320 755 20000 2554.6.13 11250Narasingha Prasad White Stone 3839(p) 45000 2564.6.13 8775Matiapada White Stone 7339(p) 35100 2574.6.13 194250Dangarapada New Building Stone 271/1 1246(p) 777000 2584.6.13 76640Kund Kundi Kunda Building stone 535213(p) 306560 2594.6.13 150000Hatia Building stone 832/1 277(p) 600000 2604.6.13 135250Hatia Building stone 832/1 277(p) 541000 276(p)
2614.6.13 132500Hatia Building stone 832/1 276(p) 530000 2624.6.13 2402750Tangini Building stone 937/1 2907 9611000 27310.6.13 214423Kund Kundi Kunda Building stone 532/2 1745 857690 42726.7.13 1706275Kabar kha Building stone 4011498 6825101 1499
42826.7.13 103500Kund Kundi Kunda Building stone 532/2 1744 414000 58831.8.13 777500Radhakantapur Laterite stone 255/1 421 3110000 58931.8.13 225000Kabar ka Building stone 4011678(p) 900000 59031.8.13 504375Kabar ka,kha,ga,gha Building stone 272/1 1237(p) 2017500 982(p) 991(p)
59131.8.13 113000Dhania South East 8492864(p) 452000 59231.8.13 53750Sankhari South 8493502(p) 215000 59331.8.13 33250Sankhari South 8493502(p) 133000 Total 6847488 27389951 Further it is the duty of the Temple Administration to collect surface rent in advance and the royalty from the lease Holder considering the quantity extracted shown in the monthly return submitted by the lease Holder. It is observed from the produced case records that the authority have not taken any steps to collect the royalty and surface rent and subsequently to deposit the same with the relevant authority.
At the time of exit conference the local authority had produced the reply of the Additional Chief Secretary; Revenue & Disaster Management Dept to the clarification sought by them regarding collection of 25% of bid amount, surface rent clarification in their letter no 12308 dtd 4.11.2013. In that reply by the Additional Chief Secretary; which was addressed to the All Collectors/All Sub-Collectors/All Tahasildars and a copy forwarded to Administrator (Dev); SJT; Puri vide letter no RDM-CLRFIC-0004-2012-44540 dtd 27.11.2013 where it is stated that " Since notice for Auction has already been done which contained the term of auction as per rule 39 of OMMC Rules, 2004 and the functionaries are in the mid of the auction process the aforesaid circular shall be effective from the next financial year i.e 2014-15(FY)". In consideration of this letter objection para is dropped with suggestion to take effective steps from this year onwards. Had the matter been cleared up much prior to the release of fund, the loss
54 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
amount to the tune of Rs.6847488.00 as calculated in above table could have been saved for temple fund. However it is ironical that due to communication gap between the law implementing agency and law abiding agency, there is inadvertent loss of govt revenue in lakhs.
13.5 - -General irregularities in individual cases in respect of quarry permit-OSP142 to 156
Audit reference:- 1)25 no.s of case records as enlisted in the attached table No.-1,
2) The Orissa Minor Minerals Concession Rules,2004.
Audit criteria:-
1) On scrutiny of the following case records as enlisted in the attached table , it appears that , no environment clearance certificates have been obtained and attached to the records. As per OMMC Rule, environment clearance certificate from SEIAA (State Environment Impact Assessment Authority), Odisha is obligatory to be produced by the leasee before assignment of lease. The local authority was requested to explain the cause behind the lease assignment without said certificate. In response to Audit Objection Memo,it was reported ,"Though auction was made in respect of 10 nos. of quarries shown in the statement, the concerned auction holders have not produced the environment clearance certificate for which no agreement was made with them nor work order has been issued in their favour."
Case no. Land schdule of quarry Lease period Bid amount Lease amount Name of the lease holder Mouza Khata no. Plot no. Area in acre P.S.
14/13 Nijagada tapanga 832/1 276(p) 1.275 1.8.13 to 31.7.14 524000 530000 Amarjit Jena
17/13 Nijagada tapanga 832/1 277(p) 6 1.8.13 to 31.7.14 594000 600000 Madhsudan Patalsingh
13/13 Kaipadar 849 2864(p) 5 21.12.13 to 31.3.14 45000 452000 Satya kr. Harichandan
39/13 Narangada 532/2 1745(p) 7.02 1.8.13 to 31.7.14 857690 857690 Utkalika
16/13 Nijagada tapanga 823/1 276(p) 2.6 1.8.13 to 31.7.14 528000 541000 Achyutsnsnda Paikray 277(p)
30/13 Narasingha 383 9(p) 2.3 1.8.13 to 31.7.14 40000 45000 Pravat Kr. Patasahani prasad
23/13 Dangara pada 271/1 1246(p) 2.1 1.8.13 to 31.8.14 728000 777000 Dagara minerals and construction Pvt. Ltd., BBSR
35/13 Kiajhari 320 755(p) 1 1.8.23 to 31.7.14 17000 20000 Ramesh Ch. Sahoo
002/13 Kaipadar 937/1 2907 24.63 1.8.13 to 31.7.14 3038000 9611000 Rajani Kr. Routray
28/13 Malipada 733 9(p) 1 1.8.13 to 31.7.14 23000 35100 Prafulla Sahoo
Without any work order, without any agreement, how the lease permit were granted to the highest bidder, merits special investigation and report.It may be mentioned here that the temple authority have given more importance to earning by hook or crook by keeping their eyes closed towards the environmental pollution.
2)Referred the lease case of Kundkundikunda black khandolite stone quarry at-Kurumapada, Narangarh, Khata no 525, plot no.213(p) of area 2.5
55 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
acre. The quarry was let on lease to Sri Lingaraj Kodamasingh in a bid amount Rs.306560.00 during 2013-14.Sri Kodamasingh just after payment of lease amount has started excavating from the quarry. No agreement has been made and no office order was issued. No environment clearance certificate also was also obtained. On verification of the case record, it is observed that the local authority has written a letter No.185 dt.22.5.13 to the I.I.C.,,Jankia P.S. to make field inquiries against the illegal excavation/ theft of khandolite stones from the recorded land at Naran Garh and Kurumapada as mentioned below.
Mouza Khata No. Plot No. Area in Acre. Kurumaoada 535 213(p) 2.5 Narangada 532/1 1744(p) 2.215 1745(p) 7.020 1980(p) 2.130 After that, the file contains nothing about the follow up action.The local authority was requested to inform whether any penalty has been imposed on the lease holder and his security deposit amounting to Rs.30656.00 has been confiscated or not. and as they are punishable under Indian penal code, what short of exemplary action was taken against the lease holder. The local authority did not comply the point.
Further during the year 2012-13 the consolidated area of the quarry was leased for an year obtaining a lease amount of Rs.1540000.00.The local authority did not explain, whether the consolidated area as stated in the tables i.e. leased during 2012-13 has been parted during 2013-14 in different units and leased separately or not. He was also requested to explain what is the position of plot No.1980(p) of 2.130 acre in Narangada Mouza as no record is there regarding lease of said area during 2013-14. In response to Audit Objection Memo, it was reported "Plot No.1980 of mouza-Narangarh was left out as there was no stone available in this plot as reported by Naib-Tahasildar, Jatni vide Jatani office letter No.451 dt.19.12.13. So the plot no 1980 was exempted/d from the quarry list." It may be stated that no copy of said report of the Naib -Tahasildar was provided to the Audit for verification. It is before declaration of the Naib-Tahasildar, the plot was exempted from the auction list.
Mouza Khata No. Plot No. Area in Acre. Kurumapada 535 213(p) 2.5 Lingaraj Kodamasingh Rs.306560.00 Narangada 532/1 1744(p) 2.215 Sri Pravat Kr. Harichandan Rs.415000.00 1745(p) 7.020 Utkalika Rs.857690.00 1980(p) 2.130 No lease is recorded. The advertisement in Oriya daily has been verified. No advertisement is found there for auction of 7.02 acre quarry area at plot No.1745(p) mouza-Narangada. But the Managing Director, Odisha State Co-operative Handicraft Corporation Ltd.(Utkalika), BBSR has been permitted to take the quarry on lease @ upset price of Rs.857690.00 without any negotiation. Managing Committee approval for such lease without advertisement was produced before Audit for verification on issue of Audit Objection Memo.
However quarries mentioned in the above table are situated in the area against which allegation was lodged by the local authority towards illegal excavation of khandolite stone. Where the case of Lingaraj Kodamasingh is high lighted, other cases of involved areas are surfaced in spite of allegation of illegal excavation. The inquiry report on the said quarries and the documentary evidence in support of legal actions taken against the lease Holders were not produced before Audit for verification in spite of issue of Audit Objection Memo.
Originally the plot No.213 of khata No.535 of Kundkundikunda quarry, Kurumapada mouza consists of area of 3.5 acre is recorded in the quarry permit Register. But while permitting lease during 2013-14, 2.5 acre has been leased to Sri Lingaraj Kodamasingh. So by not leasing 1 acre for the year 2013-14 there is a minimum loss of Rs. 122000.00 approx to the Temple Authority as in the above cases no lease was given below Rs. 122000.00 per acre in the same area. Hence that amount is recoverable from the Administrator (Development), and the concerned Land Officer
3. In the following cases, without any agreement, without any work order, the lease holders are allowed to extract the minerals from the mines. In the same case of Sri Kodamasingh, allegation was lodged in concerned police station, but in the following cases, no allegation is lodged.
Land schedule of quarry Area in acre Bid amount Lease amount Name of the lease holder Realisation particulars
Mouza Plot no. Khata No. Heads of receipt M/R No. Amount
Kaipadar 937/1 2635(p) 2.5 149000 175500 Subash Ch. Sethi T.C.S. 309/17.4.13 3510 I.S.D. 308/17.4.13 17550 Lease amount 307/17.4.13 175500
Kaipadar 937/1 3031(p) 4.6 445000 452000 Pradeep Kr. Routray T.C.S. 949/21.5.13 9040 3028(p) 2.9 3071(p) 7.5
I.S.D. 950/21.5.13 45200 Lease amount 951/21.5.13 452000
Narangada 532/1 1851 0.645 78810 80000 Pravat Kr.T.C.S. 1441/10.6.13 1600 Harichandan
56 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
I.S.D. 1442/10.6.13 8000 Lease amount 6187/10.2.14 31700
5651/13.1.14 25000 1533/13.6.13 5000 1443/10.6.13 18300 4. The quarry of Kalachua ka,kha,ga,gha ,mouza-Dangarapada, khata no.272/1 and 17, plot No.982(p),991(p) & 1237(p) of area 7.7 acre has been leased to Dagara Minerals and Construction Pvt. Ltd.,BBSR on an amount of Rs.2025000. No work order has been issued . No agreement was also made with the company. Audit pointed out the irregularity and drew the attention of the local authority to it, but the deviation was not complied till to the last of audit. .
Suitable explanation from the local authority was asked for by Audit. But the authority was of the opinion that the lease holder could not produce the environment clearance certificate, so the work order and agreement was not made. Further, as there is no allegation raised by police, public/staff, the extraction from the quarries are justified. From the statement of the local authority,it may be apprehended that keeping the general lives at stake, since the SEIAA had not provided the environment clearance certificates to the unfit lease holders, the Authority justifies his own standpoint . Such action of the Temple Administration is not admissible on social point of view.
13.6 - Data inaccuracyin reporting the landed property of Lord Jagannatha.OSP186 to 187(B)
Audit criterion:-1).The publication in Odisha Review, June July 2007,headed as “Landed Property of Lord Jagannath” by Dr. Chitrasen Pasayat,
2) A report in a daily news paper named “Samaj” on 25th March 2015.
3) The computerised data up to 31.10.2014 showing the landed property of the Lord.
4) The computerised data up to 31.3.2015 showing the landed property of the Lord
5) The data sent to the Assembly regarding a query on landed property of the Lord
A statement bearing the information regarding landed property updated till 31.10.2014 has been obtained from the land section, Shree Jagannath Temple; Puri which shows that the Lord is in possession of total 57576.501 acre of land. But to the Audit they have produced report on a total of 57546.501 acre (57151.249 acre inside the state + 395.252 acre outside the State). In Odisha Review the figure on landed property of Shree Jagannath also depicts a different view. Referred the publication in Odisha Review, June July 2007, headed as “Landed Property of Lord Jagannath” by Dr. Chitrasen Pasawat, which bears an information data regarding landed property of Land Lord Shree Jagannath Mohaprabhu Bije, Puri both inside the state and outside the state. As reported, Dr. Pasawat has obtained the information data from the source of Sri Jagannath Temple Office, Puri. The information was updated till 2007.
A comparative view on Landad property of Shree Jagannath Bije, Puri inside the state
No. Name of the district Landed property as per Odisha Review Total land detected as per Difference to be reconciled updated till 2007(In acre) information provided by the by the local authority. temple administration updated till 31.10.2014(In acre) 1 2 3 4 5 1 Khurdha 26816.473 26673.039 143.434 2 Puri 16712.181 17071.212 3 Ganjam 2843.530 2858.637 4 Cuttack 2165.385 3173.278 5 Kendrapada 1941.566 1164.458 777.108 6 Bhadrak 1330.730 2921.630 7 Jagatsingh pur 1144.250 701.019 443.231 8 Sambalpur 1135.990 9.260 1126.73 9 Jajpur 973.229 836.155 137.074 10 Baleswer 540.380 866.960 11 Nayagarh 216.960 268.860 12 Anugul 116.840 117.840 13 Mayurbhanj 57.970 57.970 14 Dhenkanal 56.574 214.174
57 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
15 Sundargarh 45.450 45.450 16 Bargarh 41.170 38.730 2.44 17 Gajapati 33.977 33.977 18 Koraput 24.580 18.820 5.76 19 Rayagada 19.240 17.460 1.78 20 Bolangir 14.190 52.040 21 Keonjhar 12.020 12.020 22 Subarnapur 1.000 1.000 23 Malkangiri 0.510 0.510 24 Kalahandi 27.260 56244.195 57151.249 A comparative view on Landed property of Shree Jagannath Bije, Puri outside the state
Sl.No. State Area in Acre Areaas in acre as per the per Odisha Review Report statement provided by the temple office
Difference 1 West Bengal 322.93 322.93 2 Maharastra 28.218 28.218 3 Madhya Pradesh 25.11 25.11 4 Chhatishgarh 1.7 1.7 5 Andhra Pradesh 18.987 17.02 1.967 6 Tamilnadu 11.885 0 11.885 7 Bihar 0.274 0.274 Total 409.104 395.252 13.852 8 Uttar Pradesh Ground floor of two storied building at Raibaraili Road of Haldwani town
3) A report in a daily news paper named “Samaj” on 25th March 2015 is to be referred. Where the Law Minister has given a statement in Assembly that Lord Jagannath is the owner of enormous land property. On verification of available records in the temple office, it is ascertained by the Minister that for “seva puja” & “niti kanti” of the Lord, total 81640 acre of land property were donated by the Marahatta sarkar and the British Govt. .The Lord is now in possession of all total 82034.540 acre of landed property.The details are given bellow.
The particulars of the doner Donation during the year Donation of the land in acre. The Marahatta Govt. 1843 11071 The British Govt. 1858 70569 Total 81640 + Land property in other six states 394.540 Grand total 82034.540 acre The details of landed property outside the state as reported by the Minister is stated below.
Srikakulam A17.02 Dec. West Bengal ( Purulia) A.322.218 Dec. Maharastra (Akola) A28.218Dec. Madhya Pradesh (Damoh, Jabal pur & Ujjayini)) A25.110 Dec. Bihar (Baisali) A0.274 Dec. Chhatishgarh (Bilashpur & Bastar) A1.700 Dec. Total 394.540 From the stated datas,no clear picture about the landed property of the Lord Jagannath was visualized. A data showing the position of landed property of the Lord was obtained is attached in Annexture-E.,which shows the land in possession up to 1.4.2014 is 57233.38 acre. The temple authority was requested through Audit Objection memo to reconcile the inaccuracy in the data given by the temple authority to the Minister and to the Audit. The response of the local authority to the Audit Objection Memo is as follows,"As regards area discrepancies of the landed properties of Lord Jagannath situated outside the state of Odisha, it is submitted that the temple Administration have collected the data of landed properties from the concerned state Administration basing on the sabik record. Here sabik record means the records finalised by the Survey & Settlement authorities of the concerned state. It is pertinent to mention here that settlement operation was not completed in all over India at a time or in a particular year, it differs from state to state; for example, in Odisha first settlement operation was done in the year1889-90 to 1900-1901, then 2nd settlement operation was made from1922-32 by the then rulers./Govt. (i.e.Bengal+ Odisha+ Bihar). There after when O.S.S.Act,1958 came into force the settlement operation(i.e.Revision Settlement Operation) was started
58 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
in Odisha from the year 1960 which is named as major settlement operation by the settlement authorities of the Odisha State. The area discrepancy is a unavoidable technical point. When the state boundary or District boundary is fixed or refixed/changed there might be some changes in measurement and the total area is to be corrected/changed after final approval by the head of the State. So there is a provisions of distribution of errors in settlement rules/manuals. There is also error distribution provision in Survey & Settlement Act. & Rules keeping in view of all these hazards i.e.changing of bed of rivers alluvion & dilluvion action and earth quake etc. which are the natural calamities and unforseen problems/ disasters. The area is measured by use of planimeter/acre camb which are average instruments for area extraction. In the above premises, the area can not be fixed with a particular point."
But on date of submission of compliance i.e.5.5.2015, the Audit was informed that the landed property of the Lord inside the state is 57181.249 acre only. Perhaps, no hazardous natural calamities like earthquake have been happened in between two months so that the geography of the areas would be changed. Further, no new settlement is implemented in between to extract new status of landed property of the Lord. Proper investigation at Govt.level is required to help the temple authority to obtain a clear picture of landed property of Lord Jagannath inside as well as outside the state so that the actual landed property Lord Jagannath would not be misutilised in future . The temple administration is also requested to obtain the RORs of landed property of the Lord at first steps
Hence at any circumstance the landed property of Lord Jagannath should not be lower to 82034.540 acre. But the information regarding landed property updated till 31.10.2014 obtained from the land section, Shree Jagannath Temple; Puri shows that the Lord is in possession of total 57576.501 acre of land. The addition to the landed property is possible as the devotees are making their contribution to the Lord. But in case of deletion, clarification from the local authority was needed to show the transaction and balance position of landed property starting from 2007 to 2014, which was not supplied to Audit for verification.
The local Authority is now requested to investigate on the matter and supply the exact position of land on possession inside & outside the Odisha of Lord Jagannath to the Audit.
13.7 - Retention of Govt. dues by delay in registration of land &loss of temple revenue due to non-settlement of missed area.OSP-176-184
1.On verification of produced Registered Sale Deeds, it came to notice that the area of sabik plots have been lessened after settlement and the area shown in Hal plot is less than that of Sabik plot.The cost of missed area @ Bench Mark Valuation comes to Rs.323205.00 as detailed in Annexure F. The authority was requested to explain what are the steps taken to ascertain the cause behind it and the loss of the temple fund would be recouped as the landed property of the Lord have been missed. Unfortunately, it was reported by the temple authority that they had nothing to do as they are not the recording authority and the recording authority is the Settlement/Consolidation/Tahasil Agencies.The recording authorities are competent to compare Sabik-hal area and accordingly Revised Area Statement (RAS) are passed by the competent authoriy.The temple authority is not competent to challenge the area recorded in the R.O.R. issued by the recording authority.
In this concern, question arises that:-
(A) How Shree Jagannath Temple Administration being the Trusty to safeguard the property of Lord Jagannath, not objected to the loss of Temple Property?
(B ) How the authority, without any investigation, such as inquiry of encroachment of area by other body, accept the recommendation?
The data of the missed area is extracted only from the produced land case records showing the new registration of the land on sale during the years under audit. Such type of thousand cases would have come to notice if each and every hal records of land are inquired. If proper investigation is made, the loss to the temple fund towards the cost of missed area could have been recovered. As the cost of missed area is certainly a loss to the temple, after proper investigation it is recoverable from the then involved officer/officials..
2. Further ,on verification of produced case records it came to notice that though the purchasers of the Lord's land have deposited their respective land value as per notice issued by the temple authority to them, registration of land have been made much later, for which unnecessary withholding of Govt. dues towards stamp fee and registration fee have been made to the tune of Rs.1373638.00 (25863.00+1347775.00) as detailed in Annexure G-1 & G-2.The authority was requested to state the cause backed by late registration and detain of Govt. dues. In response to Audit Objection memo , the local authority has stated that the Managing Committee took a longer time from 18.8.11 to17.3.12 to issue authorisation to any officer of the temple office to execute Registered sale deeds.The delay was not intentional and was caused due to official arrangement and process.If it is the fact, the Managing Committee have committed a cognitive offence to retain the Govt. due for years together. The same should not be repeated hence forth. But the statement given by the local authority that "The delay is not intentional." can not be accepted by Audit. It may be observed that the Registered sale deed has been executed during 2014 in favour of the purchasers who have paid respective land cost during 2008. For an example, I.O.C.L.,Jatani has paid his final premium of payment on 24.1.12 amounting to Rs.17000000.00.. Registration could have been made just after 17.3.12, the date of authorisation to Sri Saroj Kumar Roy, Asst.Administrator to execute the sale deeds But the registration is made on 18.2.14 after two years of final payment. For which the Govt. due amounting to Rs.1190000.00 towards stamp duty and Registration fee have been retained in the temple office for years together. Under such condition, the compliance made by the local authority is not satisfactory. Unless and untill the objection is properly complied, the whole amount of Rs.1696843.00 (Rs.323205.00+ Rs.1373638.00) is kept under objection till complied and out of it Rs.323205.00 towards the cost of missed area is suggested recovery from the Administrator (Development) Sri Prasanna Kumar Hota, who did not take timely action for inquiry to recover such missed area and the concerned Land Officer Sri Laxman Swain ,dealing the land matter, who did not suggest in this
59 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
concern to his higher authorities.
13.8 - Under valuation of Lords land due to implementation of unrealistic uniform policy. OSP 185.
Referred the resolution of the Managing Committee Meeting held on 24.12.2002, where discussion was made on the proposal of State level Land Sale Committee regarding formation of Uniform Land Sale Policy.The proposal was unanimously accepted and approved by the committee members. An uniform policy was formed. It was decided then and there that the said policy would be moved to the Law Deptt. ,Govt. of Odisha for approval. The schedules of the policy were intact as reveals from the proceedings of the MC Meeting held on 29.9.2004. But in the uniform policy approved by the Govt of Odisha, Law Deptt. vide their letter no.3518/L dt.12.3.03 there is seen some more strategies added to the original schedules . The details are given in the following table.
Original policy of State Level Land Sale Committee i.e. approvedPolicy approved by the Govt. for homestead land Vide Lr. by the Managing Committee on 24.12.2002. No.3518/L dt.12.3.2003 & amended vide Lr. No.9358/L dt.17.7.20061 The cost of land would be fixed @ 10 % of the market price/offsetThe cost of land would be fixed @ 10 % of the market price/offset price of the land, if the possession of land is of 30 years and more. price of the land or Rs.300000/acre maximum, if the possession of land is of 30 years and more. The cost of land would be fixed @ 15 % of the market price/offsetThe cost of land would be fixed @ 15 % of the market price/offset price of the land, if the possession of land is from 20 to 30 years. price of the land or Rs.450000.00/acre maximum, if the possession of land is from 20 to 30 years. The cost of land would be fixed @ 25 % of the market price/offsetThe cost of land would be fixed @ 25 % of the market price/offset price of the land, if the possession of land is from 12 to 20 years. price of the land or Rs.750000.00/acre maximum, if the possession of land is from 12 to 20 years. The cost of the land would be fixed @ of offset price if theThe cost of the land would be fixed @ of offset price if the possession is less than 12 years. possession is less than 12 years. For example,where the cost of homestead land is Rs.10000000.00/acre,the temple would be benefited with Rs.300000.00/acre only instead of Rs.1000000.00 i.e. 10% of offset price of the land which is in possession for 30 years and more. Likewise, the income of capital revenue for the temple is decided by the Govt. as per the strategies mentioned under column 2 of above table. It may be stated that the as per Bench Mark Valuation, the cost of the land in Puri is more than a crore per acre and most of the land have been sale registered during the years under audit, are under Puri Tahasil.
The local authority through Audit Objection memo was requested to explain whether all the micro strategies as placed in the Govt. approved policy were recommended by the Managing Committee or not .On verification of the resolution of the Managing Committee Meetings, Audit could not trace any recommendation in favor of the policy as mentioned under 2 of the above table. In response to Audit Objection Memo the local authority has stated that the Govt. have exercised their inherent power in formation of present Uniform Policy.The temple Administration have nothing to do but to obey/ follow the guide lines issued by the Govt.
The question was there that if the said policy were imposed by the Govt.,whether the local authority have moved the Govt. to reconsider the policy as the land of the Lord is being severely under valuated by the implementation of such policy.The local authority in answer have reported that the proposal of Temple Land Sub-Committee for revision of concessional rate as reflected in the Uniform Policy-2003 was placed before the Temple Managing Committee in their meeting held on 7.3.13, but the proposal was turned down.
On verification of the proceedings of the said meeting it was found that the members of Managing Committee were not agreed for reform in the Uniform Policy-2003 as proposed by Revenue Sub-Committee. What proposal by Revenue Sub-Committee or Land Sub-Committee put forth for reform were not apprised to Audit. However, the policy to parcel the Lord's land in a throw away price is not a good sign as the Lord's property is at stake..It is the improper decision of of the local authority to blindly accept the price of the land as detailed under column 2 of the above table without apprising the Govt. regarding the loss of temple revenue. The authority might have proposed to Govt. to replace the word "Maximum" in lieu of "Which ever is maximum" to revise the scheduled cost. Likely the revision of the policy is necessary for due valuation of the Lord's land.
13.9 - General irregularities in land sale proceedings.OSP174 to 175.
Audit reference:-1) Lr. No.13889/L dt.28.10.06 of the Law Deptt., Govt. of Odisha in respect of approval of the proceedings of the Managing Committee meeting held on 16.9.2006 to examine the demands of Bhusampati Suraksha Parisad, Puri.
2) Individual case records in respect of registration of sold land.
Referred the Instruction there in the aforesaid letter that if a person has purchased any Jagannath Temple land under a Registered sale deed on the basis of permission accorded by the Commissioner, Endowment after coming into force of Temple Act.1954, the
60 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
temple administration may consider the prayer of such person/s on humanitarian ground asking him/them to pay @ Rs.100000/per acre under following stipulation:- a) That such transferee shall be allowed to retain maximum 1/5th of an acre if the transferee is in possession of such land for dwelling purpose. b) For an area excess of an acre the occupant shall be liable to pay at the market value approved by the Govt.
In this respect following irregularities noticed in course of audit and subsequently communicated to the local authority through Audit Objection Memo for necessary compliance.The objection of Audit and relevant compliance of the local authority are discussed below.
(1) It is observed from the notes given in the individual case records that before providing concessional benefit to the purchasers , the temple administration have not verified the land pass books of individual purchaser or any affidavit from the side of purchasers not to have more than 1/5th of an acre of Lord’s land in his possession . The local authority was requested to ensure that he has not given the concessional benefit to a single purchaser more than one time,which he did not . Further, before sale of Lord’s land to an individual,the ceiling limit in respect of his possession of land should be checked and certified by concerned Tahasildar of the District. No such certificate is found on the body of sarjamin investigation report of any case record to justify that the purchaser has no possession of Lord's land more than 1/5th of an acre.In response to Audit Objection Memo, the local authority have stated that the land pass books have not yet been issued to the land owners by the concerned Revenue authorities. To aquire affidavit from the applicants are not prescribed by the Govt.Area to be sold have been checked/verified by land sale section.
The local authority has still not stated that without any cross verification ,how were they confirm about the transferee not in possession of more than 1/5th of an acre in possession of such land for dwelling purpose
(2) After vesting of Trust Estate on 18.3.1974 with the state of Odisha, the sale/lease of land of the Lord is not authorized. Because sec.16(3) of the Sri Jagannath Temple Act.,1954 says that any transfer of immovable property recorded in the name of Lord Jagannath of Puri by any person including any institution would be null and void. It is matter of astonishment that the mahantas were going on parceling land pieces of the Lord in their custody at their suit will and the temple administration silently observing it without taking any action against them. On the other side, the Endowment Commissioner being the benevolent member of Managing Committee,representing in each meeting, is well aware that the applicability of the provisions of Odisha Hindu Religious and Endowment Act.1951 so far as it relates to the temple of Lord Jagannath, has been repealed by section 2 of Sri Jagannath Temple Act, 1954 and to accord permission u/s 19 of O.H.R.E.Act for sale of land of Lord Jagannath is contrary to the provision of Sri Jagannath Temple Act. Still such unauthorized work was being promoted by providing permission to the matha mohantas to sale the land of Lord Jagannath.Audit wanted to know 1) why the temple administration did not chock the land parceling then and there, 2) whether the Endowment Commission was requested to report the temple administration regarding any application filed in his office for seeking permission for land sale or not. In response to Audit Objection Memo, the local authority have replied that this issue was discussed in detail in the High level meetings of the Govt. on 16.9.2006. under the Chairmanship of Principal Secy. to Govt., Law Deptt. Only to facilitate the house hold of Puri town as well as other areas of the state, the Govt. have taken a lenient view on this issue, where the temple administration have nothing to do.
The temple authority in support of such lenient view of the Principal Secy.,Law Deptt. have not produced any documentary evidence with due approval of Law Deptt. to check.
(3) In the Managing Committee Meeting held on 21.1.1999, it was discussed that due to undervaluation i.e.Rs.100000.00 per acre , the registering authority might refuse the registration of land at the time of sale.It was decided to request the revenue Deptt. to instruct the Land Registration authority not to raise any question regarding undervaluation of land.It means that the temple administration knows that the land of Lord are undervaluated.The local authority was requested to explain whether it was not loss to the temple fund to allow the sale of land in Rs.100000.00 per acre, which is worth of Rs.10000000.00 per acre in approximate. As per the complain of “Bhusampatti Suraksha Parisad, Puri.”, the land once sold to the individual by any Matha Mahanta should not be sold again by the temple office. How the said Parisad was ready to purchase the same land @100000.00 per acre What are the steps taken by the temple administration to appeal before the Govt. of Odisha, Law Deptt. regarding the undervaluation of land From the proceeding of Managing Committee Meeting held on 21.11.98, it is revealed that the Deptt. of Law, Govt. of Odisha has issued notification during 1998 that the inhabitant dwelling in their respective built house on the homestead land at Puri may purchase the same land @ Rs.100000.00/acre.Till then the temple administration has followed the instruction without appealing before the Govt., though the money value of Rs.100000.00 has been enhanced 20 to 40 times more during the period from 1998-2012. Audit wanted to know whether the local authority has claimed any compensation from the Govt.for the interest of temple against the order to sale the highly valuable land at a nominal price From the response of the local authority, it revealed that they want to suppress every irregularities showing a shield of the lenient view.
(4) Referred amended Odisha Stamp Rules, 2001 published vide Gazzette Notification issued on 17.1.02 regarding the inception of Bench Mark Valuation of land.The Revenue Deptt. have expressed their anxiety that land in different area are being registered at lower than the real market rate leading to substantial leakage of revenue in shape of stamp duty & registration fee.In contrary to the anxiety of Revenue Deptt.,the temple administration has adopted the land sale policy and got approval of the Law Deptt.,in which, the land was under valuated providing excess concession. The local authority did not produced the copies of corresponding letters if any, circulated among the temple administration.
Hence the Law Deptt. and the Revenue Deptt. in this concern in the related files to ascertain the fact.
Special investigation is required to unfold ambiguity.
61 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
13.10 - Uncertain and excess collection of land cost.OSP 198 to 199.
Referred the land sale case no.290/2008.Sri Gangadhar Das of Niali, Harishpur has purchased an area of A 0.21Dec.of gharabari kissam.As per the approval of SJTMC, the cost of land at Harispur area is Rs.347500.00/acre.In absence of sale deeds in the village of Harishpur,the cost of the land of adjacent village Jalarpur has been taken into consideration for recommendation of the land cost of Harishpur village. The calculation is as following:-
At concessional rate being documents from 4.6.81
@ Rs.347500.00x 15%x Ac.0.19 = Rs.9904.00
At market rate for balance Ac0.02x Rs.347500.00 = Rs.6950.00
Total Rs.16854.00
The temple administration has realized Rs.9956.00 vide receipt no.3035/23.9.11. Prior to it vide receipt no.3135/4.10.2007 a B.D.No.819750/13.9.2007,SBI sent by the Addl. Dist. Magistrate, Cuttack realized from Sri Gangadhar Das, Harishpur,Niali, Cuttack towards the consideration money in full of Rs.13500.00 in respect of land sale case no.57/2007 was also sent to the temple office, which receipt has no concern with this case. On enquiry in the Land Sale section, it was reported that case no 57/2007 has been converted to case no 290/2008 later on and the land cost has been refixed as Rs.16854.00 against the previous one of Rs.13500.00.If this is the fact, instead of realization of the balance amount of Rs.3354.00(Rs.16854.00-Rs.13500.00), the temple administration has realized the amount of Rs.9956.00 vide receipt no.3035/23.9.11,.As no records of correspondence with the purchaser is attached with the case record,the authenticity of excess collection could not be well judged. The local authority was requested to take steps for procurement of authentic documents in support of excess realization of land cost and produce it to audit to prove that all the collection is for a single case.But the temple administration without producing any supporting documents have tried to misguide the Audit by saying that the applicant has deposited the total amount of Rs.23456.00( Rs.13500.00 + Rs.9956.00) suomotto. If the applicant wanted to donate some money to the Lord, then he might have been issued a donation receipt for balance amount after realisation of exact cost of the area sold. From the statement of the local authority it is proved that he wants to avoid the situation. As the money receipt attached to the case record is a duplicate one, Audit presumes that, in order to adjust the differential amount of Rs.3354.00 and to provide some financial benifit to the relative applicant, the duplicate copy of the M.R. bearing amount of Rs.9956.00 relating to another case record has been singled out and attached to this case record. Till the audit presumption is clarified with documentary proofs,the differential cost of Rs.3354.00 is recoverable in equal share from the Land Officer Sri Laxman Kr. Swain and the dealing Asst.Sri Bhaskar Ch. Mishra.
13.11 - Loss of temple revenue due to less collection of land cost and non realisation of rajbhag.OSP 198 to 199.
Referred the land case record no.300/2008.Sri Panchanan Mishra of Itamunduli, Mahanga has purchased a total area of A0.562 Dec. of sarad do fasali kisam.It is noticed that on the sarjamin investigation report of the Amin,the Addl. Tahasildar, Mahanga has recommended the cost of land of Rs.136664.00 per acre. The Amin also recommended the cost of a0.562 Dec. of area Rs.76805.00.Further the land sale sub-Committee of Dist. Cuttack has also recommended the land cost of Rs.76805.00@ Rs.136664.00/acre.But the temple administration in it’s Managing Committee Meeting on 22.12.12 has suggested realization of Rs.54000.00 from Sri Panchanan Mishra towards the land cost and subsequently after realizing Rs.64000.00 from Sri Mishra, have registered the said land in his favour. Further, the allegation was there that Sri Mishra had not deposited his rajbhag due amounting to Rs.10825.00 before registration of land and it was known from the letter No.12855 dt.20.11.13 of the Administrator, SJTA. The local authority was requested to explain why the financial benefit of Rs.12805.00 (Rs.76805.00-Rs.Rs.64000.00)+Rs.10825.00 i.e.Rs.23630.00 in total would not be suggested for recovery from the person responsible. In response to Audit Objection Memo,the local authority has stated that the rajbhag amounting to Rs.10825.00 has been deposited on 18.2.13 vide receipt No.13714 of Book No.275. The same was verified and found correct. But question is arised that when the applicant has deposited the rajbhag amount on 18.2.13,the allegation against him regarding non-deposit of rajbhag has been lodged on 20.11.13. The carelessness of the employee concern is apparent from this instance.
So far as land cost is concerned,it was informed that the District level land sale Committee, Cuttack was not aware about the exemption of 20% surcharge and while scheduling the land cost has added 20% surcharge and fixed as Rs.136664.00/per acre. When the 20% surcharge has been exempted vide Law Deptt. Letter No.2918/L dtd.9.3.07, the Land Sub-Committee has fixed the land rent during 2008. It is not practicable to believe that the Tahasildar being a member of Land Sub- Committee was not aware of it. However, the cases dealt in the office level at final stage need proper care hence forth. However,the objected amount of Rs.12805.00 is deffinitly a loss to the institution & recoverable in equal share from the Land Officer Sri Laxman Swain and the dealing Asst.Sri Bhaskar Mishra..
13.12 - Loss of temple revenue due to non-collection of land cost. OSP 198 to 199.
62 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Referred the case no.308/2008. Sri Kailashnath Sharma,of Gopalpur mouza, Mahanga Tahasil has purchased A 0.110 Dec. vide plot no.556, khata no.932. As per recommendation of Addl. Tahasildar, Mahanga in the sarjamin investigation report, the cost of A0.110 Dec. comes to Rs.14566.00 @ Rs.132416.00/acre.In the case record a copy of a money receipt no.5662 dt.8.2.2008 is attached, which reveals that an amount of Rs.12138.00 is received from Sri Kailashnath Sharma against plot no.546,khata no.632 for A0.110 Dec. and the said receipt does not match with the claim. The said receipt is of the year 2008 and on the part of Audit to investigate the matter by searching the old records waits for ample time and co-operation. On a suspicious vogue, Audit assumes that the receipt no.5662 is related to another land sale case. The local authority was requested to comply the discrepancy. In this case also the same thing as discussed in para 13.11 was repeated that the Tahasildar ,Mahanga was not conscious about the exemption of 20% surcharge at the time of fixation of the land cost. The interpretation of plot no.546, khata no.632 in place of plot no.556, khata no.932 was simply a clerical and human error.
Even though the change in plot no & Khata no is a clerical and human error, the differential cost as per the recommendation by the Tahasildar; Mahanga Rs. 2428 (Rs.14566.00- Rs.12138.00) is suggested for recovery from the concerned Land Officer Sri Laxman Swain.
13.13 - Loss of the temple revenue due to less collection of land cost. OSP 198 to 199.
Referred the case no.66/2011.Sri Narahari Rout and others of Kulasukarpada, Tahasil Salipur have purchased A 0.384 Dec. land of chaka vide plot no.24 & 41, khata no.218. As recommended by the DLLSC of SJTMC at p25/c of the case record, the cost of land comes to Rs.45025.00 for A0.384 Dec.@Rs. 117253/acr. But the temple administration has realized Rs.37527.00 instead. On personal contact with the land sale section,it was reported that the Managing Committee on22.12.12 has decided to realize the amount of Rs.37527.00. The act of the Managing Committee is ambiguous as they are resisting their own formulated Rule. it was stated in the compliance report that at first the land cost was fixed including 20% surcharge and afterward it was rectified .The local authority is there fore requested to mention the lapses clear cut in note sheet for a better approach.
13.14 - Loss of the temple revenue due to less realisation of land cost. OSP 198 to 199.
Referred the case no.78/2009.Smt. Baijayanti Nanda has purchased Ao.o29 Dec. of land at mouza-Matiapada, Khata no.83/49,plot no.449/1948 availing concessional rate of Rs.100000.00 per acre. As per the decision taken in the meeting dated 16.9.2006 held to examine the demands of Bhusampati Suraksha Parisad, Puri, temple administration may consider the prayer of a person on humanitarian ground asking him to pay @ Rs.100000.00/acre ,who who has purchased any Jagannath temple land under a registered sale deed on the basis of permission accorded by the Endowment Commissioner after coming in to force of temple Act.1954. On verification of the case record, no documentary evidence in support of purchase of land from the Mohanta of Sri Gobardhan Matha, Balisahi, Puri is available. The local authority could not produce the copy of the lease made between the original lease holder of the land piece and the Mohanta of Sri Gobardhan Matha, Balisahi, Puri, who has got the permission of the Endowment Commission at the time of audit. Available records show that the land is in possession more than 14 years . On non-production of original lease documents as required above, the concessional value of the land comes to Rs.21750.00 @ Rs.750000.00 as per uniform policy. The temple administration has realized an amount of Rs.2900.00 from Smt. Nanda only. In absence of authentic documents the differential cost of the land amounting to Rs.18850.00(Rs.21750.00-Rs.2900.00) was suggested recovery from the person concerned as it was treated a loss to the temple fund.
In response to the audit objection memo,it was stated that it was the desire/purpose of the Govt. to subside the agitation to Bhusampati Suraksha Parisad and to accommodate the demands of 80000 families of Puri town area. The popular Govt.intended to come to a conclusion to solve the discontentment of thousand of house holder.
But the temple authority on enormous work pressure has allowed the concessional benefit to an ineligible person like Smt. Baijayanti Nanda, the transferee of the land piece, who actually has not purchased the said land from any Mahanta, to whom permission was granted from the Endowment Commissioner. However,at the time of review, the authority could show that the land piece was in possession of the Mahanta of Sri Gobardhan Matha one day. Hence forth, the temple authority is advised to keep all the supporting documents ready with clear indication in notes for better appraisal .
13.15 - Misutilisation of receipt books and non deposit of collected rajbhag in the temple fund.OSP 214 to 215.
63 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Attached the list of verified receipt books in respect of collection of rajbhag in Annexture H. On verification of Receipt Book stock Register,vol.-1, it is noticed that a total no.s of 190 money receipt books have been issued to the officials for collection of Rajbhag as mentioned under column 4 of the following table during the years under audit. Out of which, 131 no.s of the total used receipt books are produced before Audit for verification. The refund particulars are noticed not to have been recorded in the stock Register. On verification of rajbhag collection in Zonal area, it is observed that the exhausted receipt books are still in the possession of Zone-in-charge. The issuing authority in the temple has no accounts of the issued receipt books with him. Hence, the local authority is advised to take effective steps for better maintenance of stocks of receipt books and produce the same at the time of physical verification by next audit.
Details of receipt books issued and produced.
Total no.s of receiptOut of column 1, No.sReceipt Book No.s not produced forIssued to whom Dt. Of issue books issued. of books not produced verification 1 2 3 4 5 191 to 210 0 204(Partly used) Sri Gourahari Roy 17.4.12 &29.8.12 211 to 220 3 218 to 220 Sri Rabindra Nath7.9.12 Sarangi 221 to 380 54 221 to 229,231 to 233,,291 to300 ,Sri Harihar Das19.1.13 321 to 330 , 354 to 355, 359 to 371 &Mohapatra 373 to 380. 190 59 Out of the verified receipt books some money receipts of the following books are left unused.
Book No Receipt verified From to 309 (Berhampur circle) 15401 15421 348 17351 17369 356 17751 17782 353 17601 17603 347 17301 17315 344 17151 17176 343 17101 17137
13.16 - Loss of Revenue through Less collection of rajbhag than the due.OSP 212 to 214.
Here under the table-1 shows the scheduled rate of collection of rajbhag as per O/O no.XXIII-23/2013-891(18) dt.29.1.13 issued by Sri Prasanna Kr. Hota, Chief Administrator. The rate is fixed for Rs.540.00/per qntl. during the year from 2008-09 to 2011-12 & Rs.940.00/per qntl. during the period from 2012-13 onward. It is said to have been fixed as per the Notification no.16003/dt.5.10.12 of the Govt. of Odisha, Food Supply and Consumers’ Welfare Deptt. A copy of the said Govt. Notification was not provided to the Audit for verification.
Table-1
Grade division of land Kissam catagorised Rate effective from 2008-09 to Rate effective from 2012-13 @470/- per 2011-12 @270/- per Mahana Mahana(50 kg.) (50 kg.) 1 2 3 4 1st grade(Irrigated) Gharabari 8 mahana/400 kg. or cost 8 mahana/400 kg. or cost there of Sarada jala do fasal-1 there of Rs.2160.00/acre Rs.3760.00/acre Sarada jala do fasala-2 Sarada jala do fasal-3 2nd grade(Irrigated) Sarada jala-1 6 mahana/300 kg. or cost 6 mahana/300 kg. or cost there of there of Rs.1620.00/acre Rs.2820.00/acre Sarada jala -2 Sarada jala -3 3 rd Sarada -1 4 mahana/200 kg. or cost 4 mahana/200 kg. or cost there of grade(Non-irrigated) Sarada -2 there of Rs.1080.00/acre Rs.1880.00/acre Sarada -3 Jalasay, orchads other than banana orchads 4rth grade Temple, mathas, baje fasal,patita, 2 mahana/100 kg. or cost 2 mahana/100 kg. or cost there of
64 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
village road, banana orchads etc. there of Rs.540.00/acre. Rs.940.00/acre. Table-II given bellow, shows that the area assessed in acre for rajbhag collection from the tenants in 1470 mouza all over Odisha is 6638.763 acre including 20.770 acre at Srikakulam and annual production of paddy in those areas as surveyed by DE & S(O).
Table-II
Name of the district No. of Area in acre Conversion of area Annual yield rate of paddy in kg./hectare as Total annual mouza scheduled for into hectare as 2.471 surveyed by D.E & S (O) in average production of collection of acre=1 hectare paddy in kg. in rajbhag. average.
Autumn Winter Total
Puri 414 4004.355 1620.54 2664 2304 4968 8050843
Khordha 89 282.724 114.42 2196 2528 4724 540520 Nayagarh 58 140.290 56.77 2210 2514 4724 268181 Balasore 9 41.410 16.758 2676 2563 5239 87795 Cuttack 179 323.465 130.90106.43 1547 2788 4335 567452 Jagatsinghpur 130 263.540 106.43 2152 2356 4508 479786 Kendrapada 5 19.736 7.99 1597 1848 3445 27526 Bhadrak 5 100.692 40.75 2183 2773 4956 201957 Ganjam 558 1427.237 577.59 2148 2391 4539 2621681 Gajapati 14 14.544 5.89 1409 3005 4414 25998 Srikakulam 9 20.770 8.41 1792 3104 4896 41175 Total 1470 6638.763 20782 25070 45852 12912914 The up dated data made in the year 2010-11 as in the above table shows that the tenants are yielding 12912914 kg or say 129129 qntl. Paddy annually in average from their respective areas and are to pay at least 1/4th of it i.e.32282 qntl. as rajbhag to the temple fund. The area wise productivity of the farm land may be seen in the above table . As the productivity of land is gradually increasing day by day due to increase in percentage of irrigation,development of new technologies,the average rate of productivity is arrived 1945 kg./acre( As average production of paddy is 12912914 kg./6638.763 acre as discussed in the above table).In this context,the share of rajbhag is expected to be 486 kg.in average/acre i.e.1/4th of 1945 kg.. But the temple administration, without any assessment, has recommended the collection of rajbhag @186 kg./acre in average.The average quantity of 187 kg. has been arrived as following as mentioned under column 3 & 4 of table-i.
(298.6kg.+223.95 kg.+149.3kg.+74.65kg.)/4 acre=186kg./acre.
Audit had ascertained the measurement of "Mahana" i.e. Mahana is equal to 50 Kg. The information regarding the measurement of Mahana was collected through personal source form the local areas of Bhadrak, Jajpur, Cuttack, Bhubaneswer, Paradeep and Puri. But to comply the Audit Objection Memo,it was stated that the measurement of 1 mound (Mahana) is equal to 37.325 kg as provided U/S 2(9-b) explanation ii of O.L.R.Act.1960.So as per the said measurement the quantity of collection is reduced more than the audit calculation. The details are given below/
Grade division of land Kissam catagorised Rate effective from 2008-09 to Rate effective from 2012-13 @470/- per 2011-12 @270/- per Mahana (37 Mahana (37kg &325 gm kg.) kg.& 325 gm.) 1 2 3 4 1st grade(Irrigated) Gharabari 8 mahana/298.6 kg. or cost 8 mahana/298.6 kg. or cost there of Sarada jala do fasal-1 there of Rs.2160.00/acre Rs.3760.00/acre Sarada jala do fasala-2 Sarada jala do fasal-3 2nd grade(Irrigated) Sarada jala-1 6 mahana/223.95 kg. or cost 6 mahana/223.95 kg. or cost there of there of Rs.1620.00/acre Rs.2820.00/acre Sarada jala -2 Sarada jala -3 3 rd grade(Non-irrigated) Sarada -1 4 mahana/149.3 kg. or cost 4 mahana/149.3 kg. or cost there of Sarada -2 there of Rs.1080.00/acre Rs.1880.00/acre Sarada -3 Jalasay, orchads other than banana orchads 4rth grade Temple, mathas, baje fasal,patita, 2 mahana/74.65 kg. or cost 2 mahana/74.65 kg. or cost there of village road, banana orchads etc. there of Rs.540.00/acre. Rs.940.00/acre. The average of the quantity scheduled to be collected as rajbhag is 186 kg./acre(298.6kg.+223.95 kg+149.30 kg.+74.65 kg.)
Hence,for the discrepancy of 300 kg.(486 kg.-186 kg.)/acre, the temple have been sustaining loss to the tune of 1991628.9 kg kg.(6638.763 x 300 kg.)every year or say 19916 qntl./ the cost there of as fixed by the temple administration amounting to Rs.58951360 since last four years as detailed bellow in respect of Lord’s land of 6638.763 acre.The attention of the local authority was drawn to this sensitive matter through Audit Objection memo.The temple authority seems not to be active in taking steps forward for better collection of rajbhag in formulating
65 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
revised policy,apprising the administrative Deptt.regarding the problems.To follow blindly the instruction without any jurisdiction has been the habit of the temple authority. However the objected amount of Rs.58951360.00 is definitely a loss to the temple fund and for the Audited period Rs. 37442080.00 is suggested for recovery from Sri Gaura Hari Ray,Dealing Asst. , Laxman Swain, Land Officer -cum -Section Officer & Sri Prasanna Kr. Hota,the Administrator(Development) .
Years particulars Cost of paddy per qntl. Cost of 19916 qntl. In Rs. i.e. prescribed by the temple administration in Rs. as in Table-1. 2010-11 540 10754640 2011-12 540 10754640 2012-13 940 18721040 2013-14 940 18721040 Total 58951360
13.17 - Less collection of rajbhag by allowing lessened rate.OSP 211 to 212.
It is discussed in previous para that due of rajbhag to be collected by the temple office is 32282 qntl. per year in approximate. The Table below shows a comparative view between the MSP(Market Sale Price) of paddy as prescribed by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution Deptt., Govt. of India i.e. followed by Govt. of Odisha and the price of paddy as prescribed by the temple administration under recommendation of Govt. of Odisha vide their Lr. No.16003/ dt.5.10.12 in table following.
Table III
Years particulars MSP of common paddy Cost of paddy per Differential cost of Tentative loss to the temple fund fixed by the Govt. per qtl. qntl. i.e. prescribed by paddy per qntl.in due to collection of rajbhag in In Rs. the temple Rs. lessened cost i.e.32282 qntl. Per administration in Rs. year than the due in Rs.. as in Table-1. 2010-11 1000 723 277 8942114 2011-12 1080 723 357 11524674 2013-14 1310+100 (Bonus) 1259 151 4874582 Total 25341370 Due to the great difference in the price ratio of paddy as detailed in above table,the temple have to sustain a tentative loss to the tune of Rs.25341317.00 during last 3 years from 2010-11 to 2013-14.The temple authority was requested to comply the difference and produce a copy of Govt. Letter No.16003 dt.5.10.12 backed by the recommendation of Management Committee for fixation of such rajbhag due before Audit for verification.Unfortunately the Authority paid no attention to the Objection point. As the objected amount is definitely a loss to the temple fund,the total amount of Rs.25341370.00 is kept under objection & the less collected amount of Rs.4874582.00 for the Audited period is suggested recovery from Sri Prasanna Kr. Hota,the Administrator(Development) , Laxman Swain, Land Officer -cum -Section Officer & Sri Gaura Hari Ray,Dealing Asst. ,who all are dealing the matter from top to bottom..
13.18 - Loss of temple revenue due to putting up of less demand than the actual along with non-imposition of 12 interest on arrear claim and miserable collection of rajbhag.OSP 210 to 211
Table IV shows the abstract of demand and collection position of rajbhag as provided by the Temple Authority for the year 2012-13 & 2013-14
Table -IV
Existing demand prior to 1.4.2012 Rs.31309706.00 Demand made during 2012-13 Rs.13868176.00 Total demand of the year Rs.45177882.00 Collection of the year (-) Rs.2667103.00 Outstanding as on 31.3.2013 Rs.42510779.00 Existing demand prior to 1.4.2013 Rs.42510779.00 Demand made during 2013-14 Rs.13868176.00 Total demand of the year Rs.56378955.00
66 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Collection of the year (-) Rs.3672034.00 Outstanding balanceas on 31.3.2014 Rs.52706921.00 Table V shows the abstract of demand & collection thereof prepared by Audit .
The rate of collection of rajbhag from the table reveals that, it is merely5.45% and 6.59% of the demand during the years of 2012-13 & 13-14 respectively. It seems that the temple administration is paying a least concern towards this aspect of major source of revenue that is collection of Rajabhag. In response to Audit Objection Memo the local authority also stated that due to dearth of field staff and Co-ordination officers at the district level,it is not possible to touch each bhag tenants of each village. If such is the condition, the local authority should think for alternative to overcome the circumstances.The DCB of Rajabhag was still not prepared and produced in the meet at exit conference.The local authority is requested to work out the DCB position of Rajbhag as soon as possible including 12% interest charge on arrear due and produced before Audit in it,s next meet.
Existing demand prior to 1.4.2012 (Without adding interest onRs.31309706.00 + arrear for the past periods) + 12% interest Rs.3757165.00 Demand should have been made during 2012-13@ Rs.1259.00/qntl asRs.40643038.00 fixed by the Temple Authority for the year 2012-13 Total demand of the year Rs. 75709909.00 Collection of the year (-) Rs.2667103.00 Outstanding as on 31.3.2013 Rs.73042806.00 Existing demand prior to 1.4.2013 +12 % interest Rs.73042806.00
+Rs.8765137.00 Demand made during 2013-14 Rs.40643038.00 Total demand of the year Rs.122450981.00 Collection of the year (-) Rs.3672034.00 Outstanding balance as on 31.3.2014 Rs.118778947.00 As discussed in previous paras, the annual claim for rajbhag from the tenants should be 32282 qntl. Or the cost there of is Rs.40643038.00 @ Rs.1259.00/qntl as fixed by the Temple Authority for the year 2012-13 & Rs.45517620.00@ Rs 1259.00/qntl.as fixed by the Temple Authority for the year 2013-14. When the temple administration has fixed the rate of paddy per qtl then why not stick to the actual demand rather put forth the demand of Rs.13868176.00 each year under the years of Audit, which is near about one third of the target of the years under audit. Further, imposition of 12% interest on the arrear claim is mandatory to add with the arrear demand as calculated above. The temple authority has not added the interest while calculating the arrear claim. For which, an amount of Rs.66072026.00 (Rs.53549724.00 as demand + Rs.12522302.00 as interest) is less shown in the demand. The Authority should take appropriate step against the Land Officer & the Administrator (Dev) who are not working for the interest of the Trust? And they are held responsible for such loss. The Temple Authority is also advised to take appropriate steps for augmenting the percentage of collection.
13.19 - Loss of the temple revenue due to less collection by non defining the land kissam. OSP 209 to 210.
(A) On verification the personal accounts of some tenants from the ledgers, keeping records of land and individual DCB position of Rajbhag dues, it came to notice that the rate of collection in most of the cases have been fixed @ as prescribed for 3rd grade division of land as in table-1. On personal contact with the dealing Asst. it was learnt that the sarjamin investigation of the land have not been made for years together. The local authority was requested to produce the sarjamin investigation reports last made at any level for verification, which the Authority did not. Further as irrigation facilities are being provided through out Odisha in an increasing rate, it is difficult to believe that most of the Lord’s land are non-irrigated . After each settlement, the land record should be modified and claim for the rajbhag should be enhanced accordingly. It seems that the local authority has not taken keen interest in this corner since years together. As some tokens of examples ,following cases i.e. ed from the Mouza-Biragovindapur,Thana-Satyabadi,No.138, Khata No.-1555, Tahasil-Sakhi Gopal,Puri may be taken into consideration. The hal position of mentioned areas have been obtained from the web site i.e.bhulekha.ori.nic.in.The hal position of the land in following table shows that the kissams of the land have been converted as per records. The temple authority without assessing the land value and without verification of land kissam is collecting rajbhag traditionally. Following example shows that the temple is dropping an amount of Rs.39405.00 every year against 14 Nos cases. If individual cases are examined, the loss amount must cross seven digit. It is advised that the local authority should be conscious about the leakage of temple fund in this respect.
Table-1
Name of the tenant Plot No. Area inKissam shown Kissam found inClaim made for theClaim dueCollection in acre website. years by theas per O/Oless Temple Authority No.XXIII-23 /2013-891( 18)
67 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
dt. 29.1.13 as discussed in para 13.17. Bata Jena 484 1.2 Bajefasal-2 Sarada do fasal 2256 9024 6768 Dinabandhu Swain 2637 0.99 Sarad-2 Gharabari 3720 5584 1864 Bhagyarathi Pradhan 1008 0.94 Sarad-2 Sarada do fasal 1050 7069 6019 Bansidhar Parida 992 0.71 Sarad-2 Sarada do fasal 2670 5339 2669 1135
Sarat Bhol 992(p) 1.09 Sarad-2 Sarada do fasal 4096 8197 4101 Braja Parida 992(p) 0.71 Sarad-2 Sarada do fasal 2670 5339 2669 Laxman Pradhan 1009(p) 1 Sarad-2 Sarada do fasal 3758 7520 3762 Satha Jena 1009(p) 1.05 Sarad-2 Sarada do fasal 3946 7896 3950 Bhramara Pradhan 487(p) 0.5 Jalasay Sarada do fasal 1880 3760 1880 Alekha Parida 487(p) 0.1 Jalasay Sarada do fasal 376 752 376 Madhab Parida 984 0.52 Sarad-2 Sarada do fasal 1756 3910 2154 Bihari Jena 987 0.51 Sarad-2 Sarada do fasal 1918 3835 1917 Gadadhar Swain 649(p) 0.12 Sarad-2 Sarada do fasal 452 902 450 Maguni Pradhan 463(p) 0.12 Jalasay Gharabari 76 902 826 39405 In response to Audit Objection Memo it was replied that the classification of land are being counted,during field inquiry,mostly basing on the classification recorded in the R.O.R.issued by the Settlement/Consolidation/Tahasil authorities.So far as the information given in web sites are concerned,the datas on the R.O.R.s are brought from the same Settlement/Consolidation/Tahasil authorities.Without any inquiry, the temple authority is collecting rajbhag comparatively in a less rate from the lower graded land kissam.To quote the reply of the local authority it may be said,"As regards Mouza Biragovindapur, it is submitted that the village is a non-irrigated village and also water logging area due to water passage namely "Kanjia" & river "Ratnachira". These two passages are called pity of Biragovindapur.It is needless to mention here that the field staff of Irrigation Deptt.have usually counted the aycut areaas irrigated area, that in fact it is not acceptable as the flow of water does not reach at the tail end of the canal or field water channel.In other words the classification which has been recorded by Settlement/ Consolidation authorities is not based upon facts. Only the tillers of the soil can give factual & correct information regarding irrigation facilities on the field." From the statement of the temple authority it is revealed that he is challenging the report of Settlement/ Consolidation authority. Here, Audit have nothing to say but to wait for the fresh investigation report for future reference. It is the example of few no.s of tenants of a mouza of a district. If investigation is made.the loss of temple revenue in crores can be detected.
(B))In the following cases ed from the Mouza-Biragovindapur,Thana-Satyabadi,No.138, Khata No.-1555, Tahasil-Sakhi Gopal,Puri , it is also noticed that less claim for rajbhag have been made other than the due from the tenants occupying the area of Gharabari kissam and Sarada do fasal kissam.On proper investigation , thousands of such cases would come to notice and the recurring losses could be identified. The objection raised by Audit was not complied by the local authority.
Name of the tenant Plot No. Area inClaim made forClaim due as onCollection in less acre the years Gharabari kissam of land.
Bana Parida 467(p) 0.04 150 301 151 Braja Parida 467 (p) 0.05 1016 2030 1014 319 0.22
Benu Pradhan 467(p) 0.1 376 752 376 Bihari Parida 467(p) 0.1 376 752 376 1917
68 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
( C) On verification of the Register showing collection of rajbhag, Audit could not notice any collection from the areas at Srikakulam of 20.770 acre. The local authority was requested to report regarding the collection of rajbhag from that place.As usually, it was thought better to be silent on the matter.
However the objected amount of Rs.41322.00 (Rs 39405.00+Rs.1917.00) as detailed in aforementioned two nos of table is a loss to the temple fund, it needs further verification. Till production of compliance, the amount is kept under objection.
13.20 - IRREGULARITIES NOTICED IN PUTTING COLLECTION OF RAJBHAG WITHOUT ADDING ARREAR e.g BERHAMPUR CIRCLE OSP-36
IRREGULARITIES NOTICED IN PUTTING COLLECTION PERCENTAGE OF RAJBHAG WITHOUT ADDING ARREAR e.g BERHAMPUR CIRCLE
1. During cross verification of M.R of Rajbhag collection of Berhampur circle for the year 2012-13 and 2013-14, it was found that area wise details of 24 Tahasils of Berhampur Rajbhag circle possesses 612 cultivators. The names of the cultivators along with the cultivable land area were not furnished for the financial year 2012-13 and 2013-14. This information could be helpful for the cross verification of M.R and corresponding siha.
2. The details of Demand and Collection figure furnished in the calculation sheet of the Naib Tahsildar of the Berhampur circle reveals the facts as mentioned below.
Year Demand( in Rs) Collection( in Rs) % of collection 2012-13 28,19,009 8,68,735 30.81 2013-14 28,19,273 10,51,851 37.30 From above projection, it was found that total demand rajbhag without arrear collected during financial year 2012-13 was 30.81% and during 2013-14 it was 37.30%. From the above collection figure, the reason behind the collection of current demand for the financial year 12-13 & 2013-14 excluding arrear was not significant.
3. Year wise details of arrear due of Rajbhag for financial year 2012-13 and 2013-14 is given below
Year Arrear Due(inRs) 2012-13 1,26,39,895 2013-14 1,45,89,569
It was found that in each financial year the uncollected dues rises and due to which it may be considered as no steps has been taken for the collection of arrear dues. Further the pending financial dues break the financial growth and it needs brief explanation.
4. The arrear amount for the financial year 2011-12 of 24 Tahsil’s may be produced so that a comparative statement and tally may be formulated.
5. Classification details of class 1 land, class 2 land , class 3 land and class 4 land may be furnished from Odisha Land Revenue laws and if any waste land present in Berhampur circle should be furnished Tahsil wise in order to compare it with original abstract issued by Naib Tahsildar, Berhampur circle, Jagannath Temple, Puri.
6. What steps have been taken by the competent authority towards arrear collection of Rs 1, 26, 39,895 for the year 2012-13. Huge arrear pending creates less growth of the financial position so it needs better explanation.
13.21 - Non credit of Rajbhag collection OSP158-160
69 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
On verification of the following money receipts, it came to notice that the collection of rajbhag amounting to Rs.4168.00 are neither taken to the Rajbhag collection Register,nor taken to the Cash Book as well as to the bank accounts.The details are stated followingly.The where abouts of the collection were not reported to Audit in spite of issue of Objection Memo. On personal contact with the concerned section, the dealing Asst.stated that the said amount have been taken to the accounts during the succeeding year.But no respective entry in DCR of succeeding years or credit in bank was produced to Audit for checking.Pending verification in the next audit, the amount of Rs.4168.00 is suggested recovery from Sri Goura Hari Roy, Law Asst., in charge of rajbhag collection and credit in the DCR.
Book No. Receipt No. Dt. Of collection Collected amount
14251 to 14253 26.6.13 3500.00
286 315 15749 to15750 21.3.14 668.00 Total 4168.00
Further, on production of M.R.Book No.279,it is observed that a total collection of the years under audit amounting to Rs.32050.00 in this book from the receipt No.13912 to 13950 have not credited neither in the DCR nor in the bank accounts in the same year. On query, the Law Asst.in-charge of collection of used M.R. Book has reported that the said collection have been taken to DCR in the succeeding years.On verification of DCR for the year 2014-15, it is seen that the collection have been credited on the page 35 of the Register dtd. 10.3.15 almost 2 years later than the collection.Though the collector of rajbhag ,Nimapara circle has retained the Receipt Book as well as the collection with him still after the years under audit, no step from the office side has been taken to obtain the Receipt Book and recover the collected amount.On verification of the stock Register, it is observed that the M.R.Book was issued to Sri Hari Har Swain for sub-issue to the Amin .However it is the duty of Sri Swain to keep the accounts of every M R Books sub-issued after the year end.It is only the negligence of Sri Swain,for which the temple revenue of Rs,65280.00 have been blocked for years and deposited vide MR No6066/ dt 10.3.15.As such , the penalty for such blockage @12% per annum for 11 month( From 1.4.14 to 10.3.15) amounting to Rs.7181.00 is recoverable from Sri Hari Hara Swain. As such the total amount of Rs.11349..00(Rs.4168.00+ Rs.7181.00) is suggested for recovery.
Collection of M.R.Book No.279 vide receipt No13912 to 13950
Date of collection Amount Date of collection Amount
21.5.13 260 13.1.14 6147
22.5.13 281 24.1.14 2185
5.6.13 500 26.2.14 2000
10.6.13 1000 12.3.14 1420
13.6.13 1500 14.3.14 500
24.6.13 5688 15..3.14 228
12.8.13 800 15..3.14 1128
23.8.13 3006 15..3.14 266
27.9.13 2736 15..3.14 1000
8.10.13 1500 15..3.14 2174
20.10.13 3687 15..3.14 2000
5.11.13 2000 15..3.14 1102
22.11.13 564 15..3.14 228
70 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
27.11.13 2000 15..3.14 1000
2.12.13 1000 16.3.14 4266
13.12.13 1500 16.3.14 752
13.12.13 564 16.3.14 1419
13.12.13 1352 16.3.14 415
3.1.14 2000 16.3.14 5000
8.1.14 112
Total 65280
However,during Exit conference the Temple Authority produced the, MR no 3191 dt 12.09.13 for Rs. 40283.00 which includes Rs. 3500.00, & and MR no 1516 dt 19.6.14 for Rs. 668.00 i.e.the alleged amount of Rs.4168.00. Hence the objection made for the amount of Rs.4168.00 is dropped and the penalty amount of Rs.7181.00 is suggested for recovery from Sri Hari Hara Swain , Amin &Goura Hari Roy, Law Asst. equally responsible.
13.22 - Non production of records in support of collection towards land revenue.OSP244
On verification of noted budgets for the year 2014-15 & 2015-16, it came to notice that there are the provision of collection against the mentioned heads in the following table towards land revenue of the temple office and also collection to some extent have been made in the heads during the years under audit. The books of accounts in support of such collection are not produced for verification in spite of issue of audit objection memo and frequent verbal requests .Pending the production of the same to next Audit, the total collection amounting to Rs.9563415.00(Rs.5415347.00+Rs.4148068.00) is held under objection.
Heads of receipt Budget provision for the Actual collection of 2012-13 as Budget provision Actual collection of year 2012-13. shown in the budget. 2013-14 as shown in the for the year 2013-14. budget Sale of coconuts 140000.00 139681.00 200000.00 166333.00 Orchards 1000000.00 971065.00 1000000.00 903413.00 Certificate Dues 630000.00 618806.00 500000.00 445193.00 Penalty 3330000.00 3685795.00 4000000.00 2633129.00 Total 5415347.00 4148068.00
13.23 - Non-production of records supporting the collection of land acquisition compensation.OSP
It is ascertained from the Budget 2014-15 and 2015-16 that a total revenue amounting to Rs.40068680.00 have been received from the Govt. towards compensation against the Lord's land acquired by Govt during the year 12-13 & 13-14. As the temple authority has not produced any records in support of collection of compensation against the land of the Lord acquired by the Govt., as a result Audit could not ascertain whether the compensation amount is appropriate in comparison to the value of land or not. As per Govt. of Odisha Revenue Deptt. Letter No.LA( C)-5/2003(Misc)21963/R., dtd 30.4.2003, land value is usually fixed on the basis of sale statistics collected from concerned sub-Registrar’s Office as on the date of Notification published u/s 4(1) of L.A.Act. In case the sale date of a particular class of land of the village in question is not available, then the sale instances of identical class of land in the neighboring village is to be taken in to accounts. In absence of sale statistics the market value can be best arrived by multiplier of 16(Sixteen) times of the net annual yield (Total yield minus 50% of it towards cost of cultivation).
Besides, the accomplishment of Bench Mark Valuation is also a guide point for judgment of appropriate market value of land.It is hoped that the temple authority is accepting the compensation with a watch on market value.
Further, instruction is there in Govt. of Odisha, Revenue & Disaster Management Deptt. Letter No.LA (C) -4/2008 (Dkl.)-310/R & D.M. dt .3.1.2009 that while determining compensation, the collector shall be guided by the provisions contained in Sec.23 7 24 of the LA act.
71 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Sec.23(1-A) of the L A Act. It stipulates that 12% additional market value shall be added to the market value of the land for the period commencing on and from the date of the publication of the notification under Sec.4, sub-Sec.-1,in respect of such land to the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land whichever is earlier indiscriminately the award period is more or less than one year.It is also hoped that while assessing additional market value on day basis ,the temple authority is much more vigilant. Pending the production of case records in respect of the receipt of compensation for the years from 2012 to 2014 to the next Audit, the amount received during the said years as detailed bellow amounting to Rs.40068680.00 is held under objection.
During the years under audit a total amount of Rs 40068680.00 as detailed below have been realized from the Govt. towards compensation of Lord’s land acquired by the Govt.
Years of payment of compensation Amount received towards compensation Lord’s land acquired by the Govt. 2012-13 19872625.00 A13.915 Dec. 2013-14 20196055.00 A26.322 Dec. Total 40068680.00 A40.237 Dec.
13.24 - Loss of revenue due to less realisation of less amount towards Annuity and Compensation.OSP172-173
A total sum of Rs. 1583056.00 has been received from the Govt. towards Annuity & compensation in respect of Sateisi Hazari and Ekharajat Mahal through perpetual Annuity payment Order (P.A.P.O.) bills and duly credited to Sri Jagannath Temple Fund as per the details given bellow.
Received during theMR No./Dt. Amount received year 2012-13 7168/31.3.13 52879.00 2012-13 7169/31.3.13 738649.00 2013-14 7368/31.3.14 791528.00 Total amount received 1583056.00
On verification of the cited file, it came to notice that since 1999, claims for compensation have been made @ Rs.738649.00 & Rs.52879.00 against P.A.P.O.No.292 to 299/98-99 and 6 to 8/2003 respectively each year before the Compensation Officer, Puri. Each year the Administrator, Sri Jagannath Temple, Puri put forth the application showing exact requirement of compensation annuity before the Compensation Officer, zone-I & zone-ii, Puri. As per the requirement made by the temple administration, the Compensation Officer pushed the Asst. Land Reform Commissioner (LR Branch), Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack to release the said amount and accordingly the fund is released. This is the regular process adopted in the temple office. It is mentioned here that the annuity payment formula at (A) followed by the computation of present value formula at (B) as prescribed by Food Corporation of India.
(A) P=r(PV)
1-(1+r) –n
P=Payment
PV=Present value
R=Rate per period
N= Number of period
(B) PV = C1
(1+r)n
C1 = Cash flow at period
R= Rate of return
72 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
N = Number of periods
In spite of guide line, the temple administration has not thought it their responsibility to compute the claim for annuity payment by using the formula. It is to state here that the money value of the land is being gradually enhanced. The compensation amount is expected to be collected in higher rate. Audit has raised the objection and asked for the clarification of the local authority through Audit Objection Memo.The local authority has not complied the objection. On inquiry, the concerned section has just shifted their responsibility on the Govt. by intimating verbally that the revision has not been made at the Govt. Further in response to Audit Objection Memo the local authority replied, "After abolition of Estate of Lord Jagannath on 18.3.74, the state Govt. is paying the annual rent to the ex-intermediary in shape of P.A.P.O. Calculation has been made by the Compensation Officer concerned for payment of P.A.P.O. to the ex-intermediary. There is no provision that the ex-intermediary will calculate the P.A.P.O.. It is the duty of the concerned Compensation Officer to calculate the P.A.P.O. each year and pay the same to ex-intermediary. As Shree Jagannath temple Administration is a Govt institution, the Compensation Officer, Puri, Zone-I & II are paying P.A.P.O. to this office regularly. The P.A.P.O. is not enhanced on the basis of land value, it is being enhanced on the basis of annual rent which was paid to the Govt. by ex-intermediary. When state Govt.feel to enhance the P.A.P.O, then it is revised & paid to intermediary. So for the temple administration the temple is dropping it’s compensation amount in lakhs every year.
13.25 - Less collection from Nilachal Yatri Niwas during the year 2012 – 13 OSP 188
On checking the Arrival & Departure register and money receipts it is found that on various occasions less/ no amount has been collected other than due amount from the following occupants of rooms at the Nilachal Yatri Niwas as against the O/o no. 19706 dtd 20.12.11
Sl. No. GR No. Name of the Room No. Arrival dt & Departure dt & Amount due Actual collection Less collection Occupant time time (in Rs.) (in Rs.) (in Rs.) 1 7615 B. Srinivas 203 20/04/12 at 23/04/12 at 6.00 400 x 3 = 1200 800 400 7.10 pm am (MR No. 7977) 2 8316 Om Prakash 102 10/09/12 at 19/09/12 at 4.30 800 x 9 = 7200 4800 1600 4.15 pm pm (MR no. 8276/ 8387/ 8774/ 8775 ) 3 8341 B. Muralidhar Sharma 101, 103, 102, 20/09/12 at 28/09/12 at 2.40 800 x 2 x 8 + 52800 4800 104, 202, 203, 9.00 pm pm 600 x 4 x 8 + 204, 206, 301, 400 x 8 x 8 = (MR no. 8545/ 8806) 302, 304, 305, 57600 306, 307 4 8709 Nilakantha Nanda 307 01/12/12 at 06/12/12 at 6 am 400 x 5 = 2000 1600 400 6.30 pm (MR no. 9224/ 9257) 5 7914 P. K. Tripathy 201 23/06/12 at 15/12/12 at 10 400 x 70 = Nil 28000 8.00 am pm 28000 TOTAL 35200 Hence the local authority was requested to state the reason of such less collection of Rs 35200.00 vide memo no. 96 dtd 27.03.15. But in response, no reply has been furnished by the local authority. So, Rs 35200.00 is suggested for recovery from the person(s) responsible for such less collection.
During exit conference the local authority produced the required Registers and after proper verification ,the objection was dropped.
13.26 - Less collection from Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas during the year 2013 – 14 OSP 190-191
On checking the Arrival & Departure register and money receipts it is found that on various occasions less/ no amount has been collected other than due amount as per O/o no. 9270 dtd 14.08.13, from the following occupants of rooms at the Gundicha Bhakta Niwas.
Sl. GR No. Name of the Occupant Room Arrival Departure dt & time Amount Actual Less No. No. due collection collection dt & time (in Rs.) (in Rs.) (in Rs.) 1 341 S K Raj A 205, A20/07/13 at21/07/13 at 12.00 am 750 x 2 +2000 150 206, B12.30 pm 650 = 2150
73 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
004 2 383 Sunil Ku Singh A 003, C24/07/13 at25/07/13 at 10.00 am 750 + 350 =700 400 005 8.20 pm 1100 3 384 BrajaBihari Mishra C 007 25/07/13 at30/07/13 at 8.00 pm 350 x 6 =Nil 2100 1.15 pm 2100 4 614 Narendra Kishore Mishra B 002 15/08/13 at15/08/13 at 6.30 pm 650 500 150 1.30 pm (The stay is for 5 hrs which exceeds the brief stay limit of 3 hrs) 5 838 Bikram Pradhan B 008 14/09/13 at15/09/13 at 4.00650 x 2 = 1300 550 750 10.00 am pm 6 904/ 905 Mahendra Jangir & groups 8 rooms22/09/13 at25/09/13 at 8.00750 x 8 x 3 + 75050650 750 of A8.00 am am x 6 x 4 + 350 x 11 block x 4 = 51400 6 rooms22/09/13 at25/09/13 at 2.30 of A8.00 am pm block & 11 rooms of C block 7 2042 Santanu Majumdar 4 rooms26/12/13 at28/12/13 at 8.10350 x 4 x 3 =3850 350 of C8.30 am pm 4200 block 8 2308 Pandurang Bhajan Mandali 21 16/01/14 at26/01/14 at 8.00384500 382250 2250 rooms of10.00 am am A block, 22 rooms of B block and 24 rooms of C block 9 2307 G.R. Thulasiraman B 206 16/01/14 at22/01/14 at 4.00650 x 7 = 4550 4400 150 9.30 am pm TOTAL 7050 Hence the local authority was requested to state the reason of such less collection of Rs 7050.00 vide memo no. 98 dtd 27.03.15. But in response, no reply has been furnished by the local authority. So, Rs 7050.00 is suggested for recovery from the person(s) responsible for such less collection.
During exit conference local authority produced their compliance along with relevant records which are verified & found correct. Hence objection para is dropped.Sri Arun Panigrahi , H.K.E.had deposited Rs.150.00 vide M.R.No.10373/29.7.15 & Rs.350.00 vide M.R.No.327/25.07.2013 which are also verified.
13.27 - Less collection from Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas during Package period OSP 192-194
While verifying the Arrival & Departure register and Money receipts of Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas for the year 2013 – 14 irregularity was noticed in the collection of room rent during Rath Yatra (09/07/13 to 11/07/13) and Bahuda Yatra (17/07/13 to 19/07/13) package period.
Here under is the 3 days accommodation package for public provided by the temple administration vide O/o no. 6040 dtd 28.05.13 during the package period.
1. VIP suits & Tripple bedded A/C – 7200/-
2. 301 & 201 (front facing double bedded A/C) – 7200/-
3. Double bedded A/C – 6100/-
4. Double bedded non A/C – 300/-
5. Triple bedded Non A/c – 4500/-
6. 6 bedded Dormitory – 4500/-
74 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
7. 8 bedded Dormitory – 6100/-
8. 5 bedded Dormitory – 4500/-
9. 7 bedded Dormitory – 6300/-
Extra service charges @ 7.416% in respect of A/C rooms only; for extra bed (single) 650/- & extra bed (double) 1000/- will be charged.
While verifying the above mentioned records it came to notice that Sri Arun Ranjan Panigrahi, the House Keeping Executive had put forth an application before the Administrator stating that most of the rooms in Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas were lying vacant and so it might be allowed to collect the proportionate rate of the package from the pilgrims on day basis. Further it was found that without any verification of following points i. The bookings (by both offline and online mode), ii. The booking register and iii. Unwillingness of public to avail package, the authority gave a standing order to collect the proportionate rate on the margin of the application as recorded in the Order sheet no. 281 of file no. XXIII 4/14.
It is just incredible that the devotees are not availing any sort of accommodation package during the car festival of their beloved deities at the holy shrine of Puri. The authority should have gone through the matter before issuing order. Such action of the authority is backed by some ambiguity as detailed below:
1. Whether proper advertisement was made through electronic media and print media.
2. When package facilities were effective in Nilachal Yatri Niwas and Nilachal Bhakta Niwas, why the implementation of such package failed in Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas? The reason may be clarified.
3. When package facilities were declared much prior to the car festival, the H.K.E. was expected to report the fact at least 15 days prior to the festival. But all of a sudden, a day before the package period i.e., on 08.07.13 the H.K.E. has just written an application and got approved on the spot to collect the proportionate rate of rent from tenants for whom the temple has lost the revenue amounting to Rs 122190.00 as detailed below.
SL. NAME OF THEGR NO. ROOM ARRIVAL DEPARTURE AMOUNT TOACTUAL DIFFERENCE NO. TENANT NO. DATE DATE BE COLLECTION COLLECTED 1 R. P. PANDA 31 C 003 10/7/2013 12/7/2013 3000 2500 500 2 SANJAY KU RAWL 9 A 001, 9/7/2013 10/7/2013 15468 10312 5156 A 006 3 BENUDHAR PANDA 35 C 101 11/7/2013 11/7/2013 3000 1000 2000 4 P K HARICHANDAN 33 C 001 11/7/2013 11/7/2013 3000 1000 2000 5 KHITISH CH TRIPATH36 B 104 11/7/2013 12/7/2013 6552 2184 4368 Y 6 NILACHAL POWER B BLOCKPACKAGE PERIOD 6552 4368 2184 NETWORK PVT LTD ROOM 7 LAXMIKANTA DAS 30 A 207 9/7/2013 10/7/2013 7734 5156 2578 8 R N PAL 272 A 106 17/7/13 19/7/13 23202 15480 7722 A 107 A 108 9 ALEKH GAJENDRA 37 C 102 11/7/2013 12/7/2013 3000 1000 2000 10 BASANTA PATTNAIK 241 B 206 16/7/13 at19/7/13 at 650 + 6552 =5020 2182 9.15 am 10.30 am 7202 11 P K MOHANTY 244 A 001 16/7/13 at18/7/13 at 1500 + 15468 =1500 15468 A 002 2.30 pm 9.45 am 16968 12 PANKAJ BASINI PANI 264 A 003 17/7/13 at18/7/13 at7734 2578 5156 11.00 am 8.00 am 13 DEEPAK SAHOO 265 A 105 17/7/13 at18/7/13 at7734 2578 5156 11.00 am 9.00 am 14 RAJKISHORE ROUT 271 B 104 17/7/13 at18/7/13 at6552 2185 4367 3.30 pm 2.10 pm 15 AJAYA KU DUTTA 273 B 101 17/7/13 at18/7/13 at6552 2185 4367 5.00 pm 3.45 pm 16 SIDDHARTH SANKAR 274 A 102 17/7/13 at18/7/13 at6552 2580 3972
75 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
DASH 5.20 pm 5.00 pm 17 LALIT DEBATA 283 B 201 17/7/13 at18/7/13 at6552 2185 4367 9.00 pm 8.00 pm 18 PABITRA MOHAN PAN284 A 006 17/7/13 at18/7/13 at7734 2578 5156 IGRAHI 9.05 pm 10.45 pm 19 ARUKUR NAYAK 286 B 207 17/7/13 at19/7/13 at6552 4370 2182 11.00 pm 01.45 20 ASISH KU PANDA 287 C 003 18/7/13 at20/7/13 at3000 2000 1000 3.00 am 3.00 am 21 DEEPAK KU MISHRA 289 B 006 18/7/13 at19/7/13 at6552 2185 4367 9.30 am 9.00 am 22 BIJAYA KU NAYAK 291 B 106 18/7/13 at19/7/13 at6552 2185 4367 2.00 pm 1.30 pm 23 PRASANTA BEHERA 292 B 102 18/7/13 at20/7/13 at9552 3152 6400 C 104 4.30 pm 3.30 pm 24 AJAY MARTHA 296 C 208 18/7/13 at19/7/13 at3000 1000 2000 7.15 pm 4.50 pm 25 TRILOCHAN PADHI 298 C 102 18/7/13 at19/7/13 at3000 1000 2000 8.50 pm 6.45 am 26 KAILASH SAHOO 302 B 103 19/7/13 at20/7/13 at6552 3200 3352 12.00 10.30 am 27 MAHENDRA KU PADHI 304 C 208 19/7/13 at20/7/13 at3000 1000 2000 5.10 pm 14.10 pm 28 SARITA ACHARYA 303 C 102 19/7/13 at20/7/13 at3000 0 3000 12.30 pm 8.00 am 29 SUDIP SAHA 305 C 108 19/7/13 at21/7/13 at6000 2700 3300 C 203 5.25 pm 11.00 am 30 BRAJA KISHORE306 B 004 19/7/13 at20/7/13 at6552 2185 4367 SAHOO 12.30 pm 1.00 pm 31 ISMAIL MOHAMMED 307 A 003 19/7/13 at20/7/13 at7734 2578 5156 12.30 pm 12.00 TOTAL 191964 93944 122190 Hence Local authority was requested to investigate the matter properly and report the matter to audit vide memo no. 99 dtd 27.03.15. In response, the local authority has replied that proper advertisement was given to different electronic media and print media and scrolls regarding the inaugural opening of the Gundicha Bhakta Niwas. The local authority has also mentioned in the reply that since Gundicha Bhakta Niwas was opened on 8th July and booking was poor so permission was sought from the Administrator (Niti) to sell the room on day basis without waiting for booking under the package scheme only, under humanitarian ground and as per the order of the Chief Administrator, the single day booking was implemented. But the order of the Chief Administrator has not been produced to audit for verification. Hence Rs 1,22,190.00 is held under objection till production of the same.
During exit conference local authority produced the compliance basing on all the points of objection. They stated that proper advertisement was made through electronics media, print media & electrified hoarding.On 8th july advertisement was given regarding package scheme & Rath Yatra was on 10th July .There was very short span of time to make the package scheme successful.It was noticed that a number of rooms were left vacant .Then it was reported to the Administrator (Niti) to sell the rooms on day basis & after order of chief Administrator the single day booking was implemented.Uncollected amount of Rs.5156.00 &185.00 have been deposited by Sri Arun Panigrahi,H.K.P. vide M.R.No.10374/29.7.15 & M.R.No.10433/1.8.15 respectively which are also verified .Hence objection para is dropped.
13.28 -
This para on loss of interest on corpus fund fixed deposit is deleted
13.29 - Less Realization of Quarter Rent OSP-105
While checking files of establishment section it is found that Sri Arun Ranjan Panigrahi, House Keeping Executive under M.K. Routray, Labour contractor has been paid Rs. 7500.00 p.m. (Rs. 6000.00 + Rs. 1500.00) towards House Rent Allowance and Conveyance Allowance apart from his regular contractual salary. Again it is noticed from the Quarter Allotment File he has been allotted a A-4 type quarter at Hatisala from Dec’ 2012 against which he is paying Rs. 2160.00 per month (Rs. 410.00 licence fee and Rs. 1750.00 standard rate) through money receipt as fixed by the temple administration vide file order dtd30.11.2012.
76 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
But as per Govt. norms a contractual employee is not eligible for govt. quarter. If allowed, keeping in view of the exigency, he has to pay market rate of the quarter i.e., 5 times of the standard rate amounting to Rs8750.00 (1750 x 5) to occupy a quarter. But as against Rs.8750.00, he has been paying Rs 2160.00 from Dec.2012. Audit objection memo was issued in this regard to clarify the matter. In response to the memo the local authority stated that as per para 8 of G.O. dtd15.12.2010onfixationoflicensefeeissuedbyfinancedeptt.theHouseKeepingExecutiveisrequiredtopaystandardonly.
But an employee who is provided with a quarter, in no case be paid House Rent Allowance. Since Arun Ku. Panigrahi, H.K.E., has been paid House Rent Allowance as well as conveyance allowance this rule is not applicable to him. Hence Rs 1,05,440.00 (calculated below) needs recovery fromthepersonconcerned&compliancereportedtoaudit.
House Rent due per month Rs 8750.00 (1750.00 X 5)
House Rent paid per month Rs 2160.00
Less realization of house rent per month Rs 6590.00
Less realization of house rent for 16 months i.e., Dec'12 to March'14 is Rs 1,05,440.00
But as per Govt. norms a contractual employee is not eligible for govt. quarter. If allowed, keeping in view of the exigency, he has to pay market rate of the quarter i.e., 5 times of the standard rate amounting to Rs8750.00 (1750 x 5) to occupy a quarter. But as against Rs.8750.00, he has been paying Rs 2160.00 from Dec.2012. Audit objection memo was issued in this regard to clarify the matter. In response to the memo the local authority stated that as per para 8 of G.O. dtd15.12.2010onfixationoflicensefeeissuedbyfinancedeptt.theHouseKeepingExecutiveisrequiredtopaystandardonly.
But an employee who is provided with a quarter, in no case be paid House Rent Allowance. Since Arun Ku. Panigrahi, H.K.E., has been paid House Rent Allowance as well as conveyance allowance this rule is not applicable to him. Hence Rs 1,05,440.00 (calculated below) needs recovery fromthepersonconcerned&compliancereportedtoaudit.
House Rent due per month Rs 8750.00 (1750.00 X 5)
House Rent paid per month Rs 2160.00
Less realization of house rent per month Rs 6590.00
Less realization of house rent for 16 months i.e., Dec'12 to March'14 is Rs 1,05,440.00
13.30 - Non-production of records in connection with the income out of sale of the products from Nilachal Upaban,Koili Baikuntha,Gundicha Mandir, Barabati Panchabati etc.
The temple administration on demand of Asset Register has not produced it to ascertain the No.s of Khamaras,Orchards in possession of the Lord. The following statement showing the income derived out of the sale of products from the Khamaras has been prepared by Audit on production of the relevant records. But, how much income is occured from Nilachal Upaban,Koili Baikuntha, Gundicha Mandir, Barabati Panchabati etc.could not be ascertained due to non-production of the records.From the following table it may be observed that income in some cases have been decreased during the year 2013-14. For an example the income out of sale of paddy in Bagha Khamara and Dochhian Khamara may be taken for consideration. When income in this head is increased in Bagha Khamara confiscately during the year 2013-14, that in Dochhian Khamara is zero during 2013-14. It seems that the temple authority has not investigated the cause behind it. The temple administration has not taken any steps for better production and better income. It is hoped that the authority would try to improve the income standard from the Khamaras and other revenue source by improving the yield standard by new plantation and implementation of new technology in old plants.
Sale of coconuts and other incomes from the Khamaras.
Name of the Mahal Particulars of the product Amount collected during 2012-13 Amount collected during 2013-14 Gopinathpur Khamara Coconut 32905.00 23309.00 Banana 1200.00 652.00 Polanga 700.00 870.00 Saru 650.00 Paddy 4957.00 7843.00 Wood 23500.00 Total 40412.00 56174.00 Bagha Khamara Paddy 141203.00 100085.00 Coconut 4994.00 2848.00 Wood 231840.00 Water 2000.00 Total 146197.00 336773.00
77 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Dochhian Khamara Paddy 30078.00 Total 30078.00 Matitota Garden & other garden Bela 1000.00 3000.00 Mango 144000.00 Coconut 47261.00 39034.00 Ketaki flower 1050.00 2000.00 Total 193311.00 44034.00 Jagannath Ballava Coconut 34821.00 78379.00 Mango 30944 Ketaki 525.00 Jackfruit 2000.00 Sapeta 400.00 Total 37746.00 109323.00 Grand Total 447744.00 546304.00
13.31 - Augmentation of Revenue from Pindika
Income from pindika is not a least source of revenue for the temple and this may be observed from the datas given here under showing the year wise collection from pindika for last five years.
Years particulars Actual income from Pindika 2011-12 649337.00 2012-13 1050629.00 2013-14 800501.00
It is shown from the above table that the income from pindika does not touch to the number bearing seven digit though the number of pilgrims have been increased consecutively.Still, the temple administration does not give up their hope of better collection every year in spite of failure . No effective measures are taken till to date for need ful.It may be stated that at the time of “Sahan mela” and “Parmanik Darshan”, the offering of the devotees towards the God on pindika at the lotus feet is generally regarded as pindika collection.As the devotees of the Lord, believes that they are offering their homage direct to the God at the time of a close contact to Him, they usually offer cash or some valuable metals like gold or silver. It is observed that during the years under audit,no metals are shown to have been collected. While flow of pilgrims are ascending day by day,the amount of collection is not being considerable.Even on the special occasion,when no.s of devotee exceeds lakhs,the income of the day is insignificant.It may be apprehended from the collection on the dates like new year's day,Rasa Purnima, Rath yatra etc.
It does not mean that the percapita income of the devotees are trimmed down or their attachment to the God have been decreased or their eagerness to earn divinity against some offering direct to the God have been weakened, rather it means that some seepage are there through which the income is being parceled behind on it’s route.This is open secret to every one. Not only the Audit personnel , but also the benevolent members of the Managing Committee have expressed their anxiety as collection from pindika is usually not par to the satisfaction.Of course, the temple authority have taken a remedial measure by appointing extra employees(Palia Mekap) for collection from pindika,but the said measure are proved not to bring good result.
As CC.T.V. camera is not allowed inside the temple for regular observation, the local authority may accept the following remedial measures for better collection from pindika..
1) Make keen observation on the collection and strengthen the internal control.
2) Make alteration of employees in charge of collection from pindika.
3) Assign one or two honest employees for the task in the group.
4) Arrange three boxes at the feet of deities for preservation of offerings.
78 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
13.32 -
Income from pindika is not a least source of revenue for the temple and this may be observed from the datas given here under showing the year wise collection from pindika for last five years.
Years particulars Actual income from Pindika 2011-12 649337.00 2012-13 1050629.00 2013-14 800501.00
It is shown from the above table that the income from pindika does not touch to the number bearing seven digit though the number of pilgrims have been increased consecutively.Still, the temple administration does not give up their hope of better collection every year in spite of failure . No effective measures are taken till to date for need ful.It may be stated that at the time of “Sahan mela” and “Parmanik Darshan”, the offering of the devotees towards the God on pindika at the lotus feet is generally regarded as pindika collection.As the devotees of the Lord, believes that they are offering their homage direct to the God at the time of a close contact to Him, they usually offer cash or some valuable metals like gold or silver. It is observed that during the years under audit,no metals are shown to have been collected. While flow of pilgrims are ascending day by day,the amount of collection is not being considerable.Even on the special occasion,when no.s of devotee exceeds lakhs,the income of the day is insignificant.It may be apprehended from the collection on the dates like new year's day,Rasa Purnima, Rath yatra etc.
It does not mean that the percapita income of the devotees are trimmed down or their attachment to the God have been decreased or their eagerness to earn divinity against some offering direct to the God have been weakened, rather it means that some seepage are there through which the income is being parceled behind on it’s route.This is open secret to every one. Not only the Audit personnel , but also the benevolent members of the Managing Committee have expressed their anxiety as collection from pindika is usually not par to the satisfaction.Of course, the temple authority have taken a remedial measure by appointing extra employees(Palia Mekap) for collection from pindika,but the said measure are proved not to bring good result.
As CC.T.V. camera is not allowed inside the temple for regular observation, the local authority may accept the following remedial measures for better collection from pindika..
1) Make keen observation on the collection and strengthen the internal control.
2) Make alteration of employees in charge of collection from pindika.
3) Assign one or two honest employees for the task in the group.
4) Arrange three boxes at the feet of deities for preservation of offerings.
PARA: 14 AUDIT OF EXPENDITURE
14.1 - Inadmissible payment of fuel coupon to House Keeping Executive (OSP 114 - 115)
While checking of the fuel issue Register for the year 2012-13 and 2013-14 with reference to the Cash Book, it is found that 90 litres of petrol coupon has been issued to Sri Arun Ranjan Panigrahi, H.K.E. The details of fuel coupon are given below.
Bike No. Coupon No./Date Quantity of Petrol issued Remarks OR-13D-0443 2168/21.4.12 5 ltr. 2203/9.6.12 5 ltr. 2269/31.7.12 5 ltr. 2267/29.8.12 5 ltr. 2315/3.10.12 5 ltr. 2346/9.11.12 5 ltr. 2375/3.12.12 5 ltr. 2403/2.1.13 5 ltr.
79 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
2443/8.2.13 5 ltr. 2474/15.3.13 5 ltr. 2528/9.5.13 5 ltr. 2643/7.8.13 5 ltr. 2682/13.9.13 5 ltr. 2715/29.10.13 5 ltr. 2740/28.11.13 5 ltr. 2778/28.12.13 5 ltr. 2810/30.1.14 5 ltr. 2839/26.2.14 5 ltr. Total 90 ltrs Further he has availed Conveyance Allowance @ 1500/- P.M in his salary. But as per Rule-34 of the O.T.A Rules a govt. servant in receipt of Conveyance Allowance shall not get any other traveling allowance.
The reason of payment of Rs 5850.00 (@ Rs 65 per liter) towards cost of fuel to the H.K.E was asked through audit objection memo no. 74 dtd 02.02.15. In response to the memo the local authority has replied,"The H.K.E has been provided with one official bike received on donation by the Temple Administration and being supplied fuel to supervise gardens and up keep maintenance of Nilachal Bhakta Niwas at Puri. The fuel is not supplied in lieu of T.A.which violate the rule 34 of OTA Rules. It is on urgent local requirement of the Temple Administration". The reply of the local authority is not convincing and the entire payment of Rs 5850.00 needs recovery Sri Arun Kumar Panigrahi HKE Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas failing which Sri Saroj Kumar Panigrahi Asst Administrator and Sri Prasanna Kumar Hota ,Administrator.are held responsible.
14.2 - Inadmissible payment of Internal Audit FeeOSP-195
During the course of scrutiny of vouchers w.r.t. connected records and registers for the year 2012 – 13 & 2013 – 14 it is found that Rs. 275454 has been paid towards internal audit fee to the C.A. firms. The details of payment are given below.
Sl. No. Vr. No. Date Amount Whom Paid Particulars 1 102 9/5/2012 99270B N Mishra & Co. Audit fee for 10 - 11 2 815 34787MKPS & Associates Audit fee for 11 - 12 with T.A. 3 1014 101124B N Mishra & Co. Audit fee for 11 - 12 4 979 9/12/2013 40273MKPS & Associates Audit fee for 12 - 13 with T.A. TOTAL 275454 The accounts of Shree Jagannath Temple Administration are being audited by the auditors of Local Fund Audit Organistaion of Deptt. of Finance , Govt. of Odisha as per the provisions made in sec. 31 (k) of Temple Act 1955. The audit fee has been exempted to the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration vide Law Deptt. Letter No. 27(A) – 17762128/ 07/04/1974. The local authority was requested to quote the provisions/ Act/ Rule basing on which internal audit through C.A. firms had been conducted with payment vide Audit observation memo No. 100/27.03.2015. In response the local authority attached a letter of Law Deptt. bearing No.JTA-42/10/0406/L Dt20.09.10 & stated as per this letter the chief administrator, S.J.T, Puri may get the audit done as per the resolution of the meeting of the SJT Managing Committee and Finance sub-Committee held on 19.04.10 &13.04.10 respectively. But resolution copies along with budgetary provision for audit fee were not produced before audit for verification of the reply. Hence the entire payment of Rs 2,75,454.00 is kept under objection till production of relevant records.
During Exit Conference on production of the resolution copy & Law Department Order this para is dropped
14.3 - Inadmissible payment towards purchase of A.C. (OSP 196)
Sl. No. Vr. No. Date Amount Sanction Order No. 1 345 2/7/2013 699600 7811 dtd 2/7/13 2 346 2/7/2013 912000 7810 dtd 2/7/13 Verified the sanction order for payment of Rs.1611600.00 (Rs. 699600 + Rs. 912000)vide the expenditure vouchers as stated in the above table. It came to the notice that purchase have been made for 24 nos. of 1.5 ton silver 3S – N Split A.C. machine from M/S Voltas Ltd against proforma invoice no. 00107/ 13-14 dtd 01/07/2013 and 24 nos. of 2 ton Split A.C. from M/S Hitachi Home & Life against proforma invoice
80 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
no. 1HHLI/13-14/ 915 dtd 01/07/2013 for installation in Shree Gundicha Bhakta Niwas . Further in the said sanction order Sri Arun Ranjan Panigrahi, H.K.E. was directed to hand over the cheque to the authorized person of the company after receipt of the material and submit the bill against the above sanctioned amount within 3 days.
But original bill and acknowledgement of the recipient against their supply of the said fixtures are neither found in the voucher guard file nor in the connected files. So there may be possibility of double payment on presentation of the original bill.
Hence the local authority was suggested to attach the original bill and money receipt in the voucher guard file and produce before audit for verification with stock entry and utilization thereof in the certified stock register vide audit objection memo no. 101 dtd 27.03.15. In response to the audit objection memo local authority produced original bills, acknowledgement of the recipient. But stock entry or utilization certificate of the above said purchase could not be produced till closure of the audit. In absence of the stock and its utilization the payment can not be admitted and till production of the same the entire amount of Rs 16,11,600.00 was kept under objection.
14.4 - Fictitious payment towards purchase of A.C (OSP 197)
On scrutiny of the bank vouchers for the year 2013 – 14 it is noticed that Rs. 249050.00 has been paid to Voltas India Ltd for purchase of 6 nos. of Voltas make 2 ton A.C( 243DX) & 1 No. of 1.5 ton Silver-35-N Split A.C. inclusive of standard installation vide Vr. No. 540 dtd 27/8/13 against invoice no. 13-14/35 dtd 23/8/2013 and sanction order no. 9760 dtd 27/08/2013. In the sanction order it is mentioned that Sri Arun Ranjan Panigrahi, H.K.E. has to hand over the cheque to the authorized person after receipt of material and submit the bill against the sanctioned amount within 3 days.
But in the Voucher guard file no invoice, bill and acknowledgement of the payee is found. Again there is no stock entry certificate on the body of the voucher. Hence audit inquired for the genuineness of the above said payment through audit objection memo no. 102 dtd 27.03.15. In response to the memo local authority produced file no. XXIII - 5/14 attaching a proforma invoice only. No other relevant documents such as original bill, acknowledgement of the payee and above all stock entry & utilization of the purchase have been produced to audit for verification.
At the time of Exit conference the local authority are unable to produce the original bill, acknowledgement of the payee and stock entry certificate as well as its utilisation thereto.Hence,the purchase of AC is treated as fictitious expenditure of Rs 249050.00 & needs recovery..For which Sri Arun Ranjan Panigrahi,H.K.E.,Sri Bimala Ku. Kamila,Jr.Clerk & Sri Saroj Ku. Ray,Asst. Adminstrator are held responsible.
14.5 - Wasteful expenditure towards printing of calendar(osp-228)
Vr. No./ Dt. Amount (in Rs.) Whom Paid Particulars 1297/ 18.03.14 436370.00 Mahapatra Enterprisers Printing of desk calendar 9895 nos @ Rs42.00 1298/ 18.03.14 297000.00 Mahapatra Enterprisers Printing of special table and desk calenders 1980 nos @ Rs50.00
On scrutiny of the above vouchers w.r.t. connected records, registers and files it is found that 9895 nos of desk calendars and 1980 nos of special desk calendars have been printed for the year 2014 and entered in a stock register page no. 230, 231, 298 & 299 maintained by the Culture and Publication Section of which name and volume of that stock register is not mentioned on the cover page. There is no signature of any authority in the stock register. No half yearly physical verification has been conducted by the authority.The stock register has not been maintained as per rule.Improper maintenance of stock register may leads to loss of stock & store.
It is seen from the stock register 7336 Nos of desk/table calendar, 1555 nos of spl desk/table calendar & 1669 Nos of wall calendar remain unutilized as on 15.11.14.As per file No.XXXVIII-/2014 Pg No.N/47 order has been issued to distribute the unutilized calendar for the year 2014 in the 15th Rajadhani book fair in the month of December 2014 which is of no use.
Without assessing the actual requirement of calendar, a huge quantity of calendar has been printed resulting in a wasteful expenditure of Rs708682.00 details of which is given below.
No. of Calenders Rate per calendar (in Rs.) Amount (in Rs.) 7336 no. of Desk/ Table calendar 42.00 308532.00 1555 no. of special desk/ table calendar 150.00 233250.00
81 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
1669 no. of wall calendar 100.00 166900.00 TOTAL 708682.00 In this regard the local authority is requested to produce the files relating to printing of calendar (File NoXXXVIII-1/2014, VIII-84/14 & XXVIII-12/13) & stock register with update position in proper form for verification Vide memo No-120/dtd15.04.2015.
In response to the audit objection memo local authority produced file no.xxviii-1/14.Order No.76/03.01.2014 of said file Administrator(dev) fixed rate for desk calendar & wall calendar Rs 50/- & Rs100/- respectively with immediate effect.Subsequently the rate reduced to Rs 20/- & 50/-Vide order No8103/9.7.14.Finally,Chief Administrator ordered to distribute unsold calendars in 15Th Rajadhani book fair at page-39/N dtd 7.11.14.From this file it is concluded that the calendars are printed for sale to enhance temple revenue.But no such effective steps are taken to sale the calendars in spite of order of administator (Dev) .Hence for this wasteful expenditure Sri Chita Ranjan Mahapatra,D.A. & Sri Sudeep Ku.Chattarjee,I.O. are responsible.
At the time of exist conference ,the local authority has produced the order of the Chief Administrator regarding printing and disposal of the above stated calendar also the stock register for verification, Which is verified and found correct.Hence, the para is dropped.
14.6 - Fictitious expenditure (OSP- 229)
Vr. No./ Dt. Amount (in Rs.) Whom Paid Particulars 1195/ 22.02.14 403492.00 Gitanjali gift & greetings, Cuttack Purchase of customized crystal memento 1500 Nos@269/- 1197/ 25.02.14 320000.00 Reactive handicraft & cooperative Purchase of 2000 Nos of society, Puri Patta chitra with cane framing@160/- On scrutiny of the above vouchers w.r.t. connected records, registers and files it is found that the above materials have been purchased & entered in a stock register maintained by the Culture and Publication Section of which name and volume of that stock register is not mentioned on the cover page & stock entry is made in the concerned page without bill No, voucher No, challan No & date. There is no signature of any authority in the stock register.No half yearly physical verification has been conducted by the authority.The stock of above purchase has not been issued to any body.In this regard the local authority is requested to produce the files regarding above purchases & its utilization with proper acknowledgement through audit objection vide memo no.121/15.04.2015.
In response to the audit objection memo local authority produced file no.xxviii-1/14.In page 21/N of. the said file Chief Administrator instructed to sale the pattachitra & memento @ Rs170/- per piece so as to make the project totally free without a pie being spent from Shree Jagannath Temple fund in the note sheet margin on 12.02.14.But no action has been taken to adhere the order of Chief Adminstrator.Hence , the total expenditure of Rs 723492.00 towards the above purchase is treated as wasteful expenditure & suggested for recovery .For this wasteful expenditure Sri Chita Ranjan Mahapatra,D.A. & Sri Sudeep Ku.Chattarjee,I.O. are responsible.
At the time of exit conference ,the local authority has stated that the cost of above materials will be credited to the temple fund to recoup the loss and credit shown to audit till then the para stands for recovery.
14.7 - : Inadmissible expenditure towards payment of labour contractor ( OSP -230)
While checking the bank vouchers with reference to the cash books for the year 2012-13 & 2013-14 it is found that Rs 17495979.00 & Rs 15431256.00 have been paid to the labour contractors as detailed below.
YEAR ABHIRAM CARETAKING M. K. ROUTRAY BINORI CARETAKING TOTAL 2012 – 13 11017620.00 8478359.00 - 17495979.00 2013 – 14 6410768.00 5993177.00 3027311.00 15431256.00 TOTAL 17428388.00 14471536.00 3027311.00 32927235.00 In support of the above payments, tender file, agreement file, licence of labour contractors & acknowledgments of EPF, ESI deposit could not be made available to audit in spite of several verbal requests & issue of audit objection memo to the concerned section (Esst). A file of M.K. Routray from june 2012 to Feb 2014 was produced to audit in which copies of bill submitted by the concerned labour contractor are attached. From the said file it has come to the notice that M.K.Routray has not deposited ESI & EPF from 1.1.2006 to 8.1.2013. In this regard a letter bearing No 247/8.1.2013 was issued to M.K. Routray by the Temple Administration to deposit & supply acknowledgement receipt of ESI & EPF.But no such acknowledgement receipt is available in the file.From the bill of M.K.Rout ray ,it is seen that ESI & EPF of Rs.1627855.00(875072+752783) . also paid during the period under audit i.e. from 01.o4.2012 to 31.03.2014.Details of which is given below:With out receiving acknowledgement receipt of previous payment towards EPF & ESI , the payment towards same for the period under audit i e for Rs.1627855.00(875072+752783) is
82 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
not admissible in audit & needs recovery.For this inadmissible payment Sri Saroj Ku Ray, Asst .Adminisrator & Sri Subas Ch. Rath ,D.A are equally responsible.
Month/Year NO of class -III No of class IV Vr No/dtd HRA/conv. ESI EPF
Mar-12 43 7113(A)/4.4.12 22661 25008 71675
Apr-12 44 7174/1.5.12 23100 25213 72262
May-12 44 71150/30.5.12 24100 34892 137498
Jun-12 44 71262/5.7.12 24100 34026 134082
Jul-12 45 71337/1.8.12 24100 34435 135699
Aug-12 45 71479/3.9.12 24100 33647 132580
Sep-12 43 70568/4.1012 24100 33644 132574
Oct-12 45 70689/3.11.12 24100 33653 132626
Nov-12 45 71784/4.12.12 24100 33577 132308
Dec-12 43 70905/2.1.13 24100 34038 134138
Jan-13 43 70974/2.2.13 24100 133465 33871
Feb-13 43 701086/6.3.13 24100 33284 131158
Mar-13 42 6868/19.04.13 18100 32996 130016
Apr-13 44 70103/4.5.13 24100 33022 130121
May-13 44 69220/31.5.13 24100 33190 130797
Jun-13 44 70344/3.7.13 24100 33458 131856
Jul-13 28 27453/3.8.13 22300 16714 66055
Aug-13 28 28595/2.913 22300 16581 65338
Sep-13 28 28699/3.10.13 22300 16562 65260
Oct-13 28 28840/1.11.13 87333 16328 64348
Nov-13 28 28948/3.12.13 88075 16570 65297
Dec-13 28 271065/3.1.14 87066 16403 64642
Jan-14 28 271150/5.2.14 88134 16464 64881
Feb-14 27 281201/4.3.13 80403 15613 61524
Total 875072 752783 2420606
Again in support of the entire labour contractor payment of Rs. 32927235.00, tender file, agreement file, license of labour contractors , EPF, ESI registration & I.T, VAT clearance could not be made available to audit in spite of several verbal requests & issue of audit objection memo to the concerned section (Esst).In absence of the said records the payment will not be certified in audit. Hence, the total payment of Rs. 32927235.00 was kept under objection till production of records which includes Rs 1627855.00 suggested for recovery.
14.8 - Mis utilisation of stock(OSP-248)
83 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
1. While checking of bank vouchers w.r.t. cash book for the year 2013 – 14 it is noticed that electrical materials have been purchased for Rs 34246.00 vide bank vr. No. 1235 dtd 11.03.2014 and entered in electrical stock register (works section) pg no. 217. In this voucher a varieties of electrical goods (halogen light – 500, 100w bulbs, CFLs etc.) have been purchased. Instead of entering the goods in the respective heads, all the goods are entered in pg 217 under heading of fussion 120mm fan/ Neo light fitting/ bulb. Out of the purchase only 100 nos. of 10 w frusted lamps amounting to Rs 965.00 has been issued to Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas. Balance materials neither issued to any body nor used any where. Hence the local authority is requested to state the present position of balance materials purchased vide above said voucher for Rs 33281.00 through objection memo No.133/dtd18.04.2015 but no reply was furnished by the local authority till close of the audit.Hence objection stands on its own merits & suggested for recovery from Sri Sarat ch. Maharana,J.E electrical.
14.9 - Fictitious ExpenditureOSP-262
Audit Ref: Bank vouchers, cash book and Electrical Stock Register
1. Bank Vr. No. 509 dtd 30.08.2013 amounting Rs 85650.00
On scrutiny of the above voucher w.r.t the cash book it is noticed that Electrical goods of Rs.85650.00 have been purchased for installation of 24 nos of A.C. in Nilachal Bhakta Niwas. But in purchase bill a certificate was given by the H.K.E., Sri A. R. Panigrahi and J.E. Elect., Sri S. K. Das that the materials are used in Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas. The expenditure was also accounted for under the head of Nilachal Bhakta Niwas in the cash book. It is note worthy that the AC s are installed in Gundicha Bhakta Nivas and for the installation purpose of A.C. in Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas materials were purchased vide vr. No. 508 & 1314 amounting to Rs 19200.00 & Rs 17000.00 respectively. The supplier of A.C. also is paid towards installation charges of Rs. 24000 in the purchase bill vide voucher No.346/dtd02.07.2013.@Rs 1000.00 per eachA.C. Since the electrical accessories have already been purchased for installation of AC at Gundicha Bhakta Nivas, again the expenditure of Rs.85650.00 for same purpose is not admissible.
Considering the above circumstances the local authority was requested to clarify whether the materials are used for installation of A.C. in Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas or Nilachal Bhakta Niwas along with production of documentary evidence through audit objection memo No.137/22.04.2015.But no reply was furnished by the local authority till close of the audit. The silence of the authority proves the inadmissibility of expenditure. Hence the objection stands on its own merit & the entire purchase amounting to Rs.85650.00 needs recovery from Sri A. R. Panigrahi, HKE and Sri S. K. Das, J.E. Elect., who are confusing the situation.
14.10 - Inadmissible payment on Voucher no-52/20.4.12(OSP-35)
Excess payment on Voucher no-52/20.4.12
On checking of the Voucher no-52/20.4.12, it has been seen that a sum of Rs 125000.00 has been paid to Amlan SERIFED towards purchase of 100 nos of Mukuta Joda vide cash memo no-9245/20.5.11,where the code No shown as DPG/274/1 & 294/1 for 20 nos & 50 nos mukuta joda respectively @1900.00 and code no -CPG/183/1 for 30 nos of mukuta Joda @1300.00.The actual cost of 100 nos of mukuta joda comes to Rs111800.00 instead of Rs 125000.00 after discount of 35% which resulted in excess payment of Rs13200.00. The reason of allowing at higher rate i. e. Rs 1300.00 to Rs 1900.00 was asked through audit objection memo no-23/6.8.14. But no clarification has been received from Niti section till close of audit. Hence the excess payment of Rs 13200.00 cannot be admitted in audit and it is suggested for recovery from Sri Debi Prasad Panda, Administrative (Niti), Sri Saroj Kumar Ray, Asst. Administrator , Sri Bipin Bihari Gochhikar, HC & Smt Janaki Karuna Devi, Dealing Asst.
14.11 - INADMISSBLE PAYMENT ON VOUCHER NO-126/23.5.12 (OSP-_39)
INADMISSBLE PAYMENT ON VOUCHER NO-126/23.5.12
On checking of the paid bank voucher No 126/dt23.5.12 w.r.t. the cash book,it has been found that a sum of Rs
84 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
69375.00 has been paid to JASKAR TECHNO PVT.LTD, towards AMC of 3nos of DG sets at Temple office & Bhakta Nivas. On scrutiny of the said voucher w.r.t. connected file No-LV-63/12, it is seen that a sum of Rs 36285.00 has been paid towards spare parts used in DG set which includes the following bills;
Invoice no- 2120302/ dated 4.5.12------Rs 4891.00
Invoice no- 2120261//3391/dated 2.5.12---Rs 15613.00
Invoice no- 2120195/3391/dated25.4.12--- Rs 15781.00
TOTAL------Rs36285.00
1. In file No-63/12 page No 23/N, only Rs 15613.00& 15781.00 has been passed for payment by the Dy Administrator (Dev). Hence, a sum of Rs 4891.00 was paid to JASKER TECHNO PVT. Ltd could not be admitted by audit.
Further, this bill is a handmade voucher submitted by the party on 4.5.12 in which the spare part shown as utilized are already mentioned in the printed voucher No-2120261; 3391 dated 2.5.12 item no-6&7 during AMC of the D.G. set installs at Bhakta Nivas which could not be admitted in audit and asked through objection memo. But on reply has been furnished by the local authority.Hence, Rs 4891.00needs recovery from Sri sarat Ku.Moharana.Electrical J.E. and Sarawati Suar DA, Sri Sudip Ku.Chattarjee, Information officer and Sri Prasanna Ku.Hota,Administrators are held responsible
At the time of exit conference,the reply of the local authority was verified with relevant files and found correct.Hence the para is dropped.
14.12 - Irregular & Wasteful Expenditure towards installation of Solar water Heating system of 04 nos of 5000 lts per day capacity along with power pack for Lighting of Shree Jagannath Temple complex.OSP40
Estimated Cost:- Rs.75,00,000.00
Agency :- Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd.(BHEL)
Work order no:- 5085/Dt.29.03.2008
1st Payment: Vr. No.:- NIL /30.04.2008 Rs.3750000.00 ( Advance paid vide Page-5 on 30.04.2008 )
2nd Payment: Vr. No.:-127/24.05.2012 Rs.3699328.00 (Net paid - Rs.3255620.00 after withholding amount of Rs.443708.00 )
Total: Rs.7449328.00
On verification of the said file it was revealed that as per clause no-6 (a) of the negotiation, the following terms & conditions have been made with BHEL for supply & installation of the said project which was to be completed within 05 months from the date of issue of work order.
(a) After acceptance of work order- Rs.37.5 Lakhs.
(b) After 50% progress achieved- Rs.15 Lakhs (cumulative total 52.5 Lakhs).
(c) After completion of work- Rs.15 Lakhs (cumulative total 67.5 Lakhs).
(d) After successful running of project for 06 months - Rs.7.5 Lakhs (cumulative total 75 Lakhs).
But, on scrutiny of the above file, it is found that the said terms & conditions have not been scrupulously followed in execution and also in making payment. The following omissions/deviations have been noticed for execution of the said project.
1. No open Tender from different competitive Agencies was invited to execute this work.
2. No agreement was made between the Regional Manager; BHEL & the Temple Administrator.
3. No service tax/VAT, /IT clearance certificate was attached in the file.
85 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
4. No reason has been given for deduction of withheld amount.
5. The said work has not been started till 29.08.2008 although there is provision in the work order to complete the project by 30.09.2008 as revealed from
Lr.No.12892/29.06.2008 &
Lr. No. 16505/29.08.2008 of
Adm (Dev) of Shree Jagannath Temple Administration.
6. Further, the said work was entrusted arbitrarily to M/s. Gayatri Engineering construction & consultancy Pvt. Ltd by BHEL (Representative of BHEL)
7. The said work has been shown as completion on 29.03.2011 i.e after elapse of 2 years & 7 months from the date of completion fixed by the Temple Administration in work order.
8. No certificate in support of smooth functioning of the system has been obtained from the higher technical authorities.
Whereas it is revealed from the
Lr. No. 9170/15.06.2011,
530/16.1.2013,
1714/16.02.2013 &
Lr. No.7777/2.7.13 of
Adm (Dev), of S.J.T.O., Puri the said project needs rectification of defects due to non-functioning of water Heating system. Besides the above from the said file it was noticed that 8 plates have been shown as broken since 11.02.13 and the Regional Manager, BHEL was informed accordingly to the said project/system.
From the above it is construed that the functioning of the above project seems to be not free from doubt as the said project became defunct within three months from the date of completion of the project. It is worthwhile to mention here that initiation of this type of a noble project was to be properly monitored & supervised with full involvement of the Temple Administration directly. But from this work it is clearly understood that Temple Administration is not at all serious about their successful completion of the noble project. Hence kind attention of the higher authority is drawn in this regard to enquire the fact and take necessary action for the interest of the Sri Jagannath Temple.
Due to the above omissions / irregularities the amount of last installment of Rs. 750000.00 should not be paid against which Rs. 699328.00 out of Rs. 3699328.00 has been paid in 2nd running bill to BHEL. As such Rs. 699328.00 can not be admitted in audit & suggested for recovery and the entire payment of Rs. 7449328.00 is held under objection.
In response to audit objection memo, no reply has been furnished by the local authority. Even during the Exit Conference they remained silent. Silence of the authority regarding genuineness of the payment. It is also not clarified to audit regarding the feasibility of the project, and the executive committee resolution & Technical sanction, Asset register Hence, the present status of the solar water heating system could not be ascertained by the present audit. Therefore,in absence of above mentioned fact the total payment of Rs. 699328.00 is suggested for recovery from BHEL failing which Administrator and Chief Administrator are considered as responsible.and total payment of Rs3699328.00 is kept under objection
For such irregular and waste full expenditure the following officers are held responsible.
1) Sri Prasanna Kumar Hota,Administrator
2) Sri Purna Chandra Jena, Deputy Administrator (F)
3) Sri Harihar Das Mahapatra, Accountant
14.13 - Non deduction of Penality from salary of Sanitary Staff(OSP-60)
Voucher No-522/dt15.9.12 - Amount paid Rs2,53,333.00
On scrutiny of the above mentioned voucher w.r.t. connected file-IX-13/12/Est page No-N/2, it was seen that during surprise visit of Chief Administrator of Shree Jagannath Temple premises on dated 31.8.12, he had expressed his dissatisfaction regarding cleanliness
86 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
of Bhitarabedha and Anandbazar and passed an order for penalty charge @ 5 % from the wage bill of sanitary staff for the month of August-12. But the above order of Chief Administrator has not been adhered to while the aforesaid bill has been passed for payment to Abhiram Care Taker vide Vr.No-522/15.9.12 amounting to Rs2,53,333.00 which resulted in excess payment of Rs12,667.00.
In response to the audit objection memo, the local authority has replied that penalty charges are subject to satisfactory progress in the matter as contained in the same order. Accordingly the relevant records were verified by audit it was found that file no -13/12 was reconstructed after issue of objection memo. Two files were produced with one no.-13/12 for verification after several requests in which no order regarding the waiving of imposed penalty is verified by the audit. Hence, the excess amount of Rs 12667.00 is suggested for recovery from the Abhiram Care taker failing which the same is recover able from Sri Harihara Das Mohapatra HC and Sri Saroj Ku Roy, Asst. Administrator and Sri Binod Kumar Panda, Dy. Administrator (F) are responsible .
At the time of exit conference,the reply of the local authority was verified with relevant files and found correct.Hence the para is dropped
14.14 - Inadmissible expenditure towards G4S Secure solutionPVT(OSP_-64)
While checking of Bank Vouchers w.r.t Cash Book for the year 2012-13, it was found that a sum of Rs.64416.00 has been spent towards G4S Security Solutions India Pvt. Ltd for wage bill for the months of 4/12, 5/12, 6/12 of the security guard. The details of payment are given below:
Sl.No. Vr.No/Date Ch.No/Date Particulars Bill Amount TDS 2% Net Remarks Payable 1. 118/17.5.12 658200/dt9.5.12 G4S Secure Solutions Pvt. 21910 438 21472 Voucher not Towards wage bill of security guard available for 4/12 2. 215/17.6.12 032248/17.6.12 G4S Secure Solutions Pvt. 21910 438 21472 Detail bill Towards wage bill of security guard wanting for 5/12 3. 301/24.7.12 237030/11.7.12 G4S Secure Solutions Pvt. 21910 438 21472 Detail bill Towards wage bill of security guard wanting for 1.6.12 to 30.6.12 Total: 65730 1314 64416 In support of the above expenditure the following documents may be produced to audit for verification.
1. Agreement files with the Farm.
2. Purpose for appointing Security Guard.
3. Muster Roll.
4. Acquittance Roll
In response to the audit objection memo, the local authority had produced the file no ix-5/12 for verification,From which it was found that chief administrator had ordered to discontinue G4S security service in his residence from 01.06.2012 in Pg/N 36. Hence the bill for the month of June 2012 amounting to Rs21472.00 paid to the G4S security guard which is not admitted in audit & needs recovery from Sri Purna Chandra Jena,Deputy Administrator (F) & Sri Harihara Das Mohapatra,Accountant.though they were not adhered the above order.the total expenditure of Rs 64416.00kept under objection due to non production above mentioned documents for checking.
14.15 - Inadmissible payment toward temparary illumination at Chandan yatra OSP-65
Excess payment made on bank Voucher No-663/dt 20.10.12
On scrutiny of the above mentioned voucher with reference to Cash Book, it has been seen that a sum of Rs1, 52,820.00 has been paid to Sri Bikram Keshari Pattaink, electrical contractor towards temporary electrical illumination for 8 days at Gundicha Temple during Car Festival 2012. But the use of D.G. set has been shown for 9 days instead of 8 days by over writing against the bill No-Nil /29.8.12, which is not convincing, and an objection memo no -40 dated 29.9.14 was sent after examining the File No-LV-56/12 and sanction Order No-9770/dt 15.6.12 placed at page - 48/c.
In response to audit objection statement, the local authority has replied that the DG set was used for one extra day as per verbal order of the Chief Administrator. However, the question that arises is that when all electrical equipments were returned after 8 days, there was no necessity
87 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
of renting the DG set for another day, which cost Rs 7000.00 more. The reply of the local authority is not convincing. Hence, this excess payment of Rs 7000.00 is not considered as admissible by audit.
Further, it was found from the File No- 56/12 at note sheet page no- 16/N that a sum of Rs 1,44,540.00 had been approved for the above purposes for payment to the Party after due negotiation made by the Dy. Chief Administrator (Niti) & (Dev) & (I.O.) on dated 7.6.12 with the party. But the party has been paid Rs 1, 52,820.00 which resulted in excess payment of Rs 8280.00 more than the approved amount (1,52,820.00-1,44,540..00)to the contractor.
In this context, the local authority has replied that Rs 8280.00 has not been paid in excess because the payment of an amount of Rs 1,52,820.00 which was approved on page no-32 dated 17.10.12 on file no-56/12 was not produced to audit for verification. So, payment of Rs 1,52,820.00 is kept under objection and Rs 8,280.00 is treated as loss to the temple fund and is suggested for recovery from Sri B.K.Pattnaik electrical contractor failing which the amount is suggested for recovery from Sri Sarat Chandra Maharana Electrical J, E.
Hence, the total excess payment of Rs 15280.00 (7000.00+ 8280.00) needs to be recovered from Sri Purna Chandra Jena, Dy Administrator (F), Sri Sudeep kumar Chatterjee .Information Officer and Sri Sarat Chandra Maharana JE and compliance reported to audit.
14.16 - Unauthorized and excess payment towardsMoblie recharge and travelling allowance to Sri Subhransu Sekhar Nayak, X erox operator/peon(OSP-242-243).
(OSP-242-243)
Audit reference:-vouchers containing theT.A.bills of Sri S S Nayak, Peon.
1) On verification of referred expenditure vouchers,it came to notice that Sri Subhransu Sekhar Nayak, Xerox operator has been paid Rs51149.00. towards his conveyance charge as he made his trips to Cuttack and Bhubaneswar in a motor cycle for dispatches the letter during the years under audit, which seems much higher than the due payment. First of all, Sri Nayak should not be facilitated with motor cycle, where common travel means like buses, trains are easily available any time from Puri to Cuttack or Bhubaneswar. The local authority is requested to clarify, what short of urgencies compelled to allow Sri Nayak to use motor cycle in stead of common means of travel . Failing which the differential cost of T.A. of Rs.42083.00(Rs.32979.00+ Rs.9104.00) as detailed below would be treated as unauthorized and excess payment. The office order backed by Special approval of Govt. in file in this respect also may be produced before Audit for verification.
Voucher No/Dt. Frequencies of trips to Cuttack and back Total amount paid in Rs. 1028/15.7.13 6 times 4446/- 1907/5.10.12 14 times 10008/- 2362/27.11.12 5 times 3744/- 1524/4.9.12 13 times 7650/- 355/10.5.12 14 times 5318/- 475/25.5.12 8 times 6048/- 427/18.5.13 5 times 3582/- 2394/29.11.13 5 times 3841/- 2923/27.1.14 6 times 4334/- 3071/13.2.13 3 times 2178/- Total 79 51149.00 A) Fair admissible by using common means of travel to Cuttack from Puri for 79 times is @Rs.120.00 for to and fro journey per day = Rs.9480.00.
B) Pay admissible towards D.A. for 79 days @ Rs.110.00 per day= Rs.8690.00
Total amount admissible = Rs.18170.00
Amount paid for Rs.51149.00
The differential amount comes to Rs.32979.00 (Rs.51149.00-Rs.18170.00)
Voucher No/Dt. Frequencies of trips to BBSR and back Total amount paid in Rs. 1028/15.7.13 2 times 900/- 1907/5.10.12 3 times 1368/- 2362/27.11.12 5 times 2214/- 1524/4.9.12 2 times 439/-
88 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
355/10.5.12 9 times 2070/- 475/25.5.13 6 times 2970/- 427/18.5.13 4 times 2061/- 2394/29.11.13 5 times 2351/- 2923/27.1.14 4 times 1757/- 3071/13.2.13 2 times 954/- Total 42 times 17084.00 A) Fair admissible by using common means of travel to BBSR from Puri for 42 times is @Rs.80.00 for to and fro journey per day = Rs.3360.00.
B) Pay admissible towards D.A. for 42 days @ Rs.110.00 per day = Rs.4620.00
Total amount admissible = Rs.7980.00
Amount paid for Rs.17084.00
The differential amount comes to Rs.9104.00 (Rs. 17084.00 -Rs. 7980.00)
In response to audit objection memo, the local authority replied that " Sri S.S. Nayak, Xerox Operator makes intensive tours in the city of BBSR and Cuttack or other places to hand over letters and notices to persons concerned in odd hours/odd places during which road journey by Bus/Train is not possible. Therefore,he was allowed to travel by his motor bike for which he was compensated for his expenses. He was also not paid T.A". Special Approval Order of Govt. is not attached in the returned memo. It is not admitted in audit and Rs.9104.00 is suggested for recovery from Sri Subhransu Sekhar Nayak, Xerox Operator.
2) Further, Sri Nayak is being paid for Rs.100.00 each month towards re-charge voucher used in his own mobile. As he is designated as peon in the office, as per codal provision, he is not eligible to avail such facility officially. The total payment of Rs.2400.00 during the years under audit towards re-charge voucher of Sri Nayak is not admitted by Audit.Suitable explanation is expected from the local authority to settle the objection. Hence the amount of Rs.2400/- is suggested for recovery from Sri Subhransu Sekhar Nayak failing which Sri Prassan Kumar Hota Administrator and Sri Tripati Nanda Dash Dy Administrator (F) are held responsible .
At the time of exit conference,the reply of the local authority was verified with relevant files which is convincing.Hence the para is dropped
14.17 - Detail bill wanting OSO87
J.V.No-528/31.3.13-Rs 5717833.00 &JVNo-311/19.1.13-Rs-9099000.00
O(n checking of Journal Voucher with reference to the Cash Book and Advance Ledger for the year 2012-13, it was found that a sum of Rs.14816833 has been adjusted vide JV-528/31.3.13 for Rs.5717833 and JV-311/19.1.13 for Rs.9099000 towards construction of Gundicha vihar, Hatisala as against the advance paid to IDCO ,BBSR as detail furnished below.
1. 637/19.11.11 Rs.3401000
2. 213/16.6.12 Rs.2316833
3. 234/9.7.11 Rs.500000
4. 637/19.11.11 Rs.5000000
5. 674/1.12.11 Rs.3599000
------
Rs 14816833
To verify the genuineness of expenditure no detail bill was attached along with adjustment voucher. Hence,audit has requested to produce the following document for verification through objection memo no-57/15.12.14.
(1).Funds detail and the total estimated cost of the project .
(2) The resolution copy regarding the proposal for the construction of Shree Gundicha Vihar .
(3)The detail s of total advance paid for the said purposes and adjustment made till 31.3.14.
(4)Whether the work is in progress or completed during the period under audit. If completed the completion certificate may be produced to audit for verification.
(5)The Xerox copy of the detail work done bills of the above project submitted by the IDCO BBSR may be produced before audit for checking.
89 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
In response to audit objection memo, no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violating the rule 14 and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule-1968. Hence , the amount audit rule 1968 (Shree Jagannath Temple Act-II-1955.Hence, Rs. 14816833 is held under objection till production of the detail bills to audit for verification.
14.18 - Production of Acquittance and Sanction Order of Arrear Palia Rewar OSP-12-13
On checking of paid vouchers with reference to Cash Book for the year 2012-13, it was seen that a sum of Rs.383930/- has been paid to the Temple staffs towards Arrear Palia Reward.But as against the payment Arrear Palia Reward Acquittance and Approval order of Chief Administrator was asked for production to audit through audit objection memo no-7/1.7.14 for verification. But the same has not been produced to audit till completion of review.
The details of payment are given below.
Sl.No. Vr.No/Date Particular Amount Remarks 1 1289/22.8.12 Sidheswar 240779 Muduli and others for the month of 4/11 to 11/11. 2 129723.8.12 Sidheswar 5827 Muduli and others for the month of 4/11 to 11/11. 3 1306/24.8.12 S.Kar and others for the month of 9040 4/11 to 11/11 4 1319/25.8.12 Madhusudan Pratihari and others 41498 for the month of 4/11 to 11/11 5 1352/27.8.12 Gadadhar Apats and others for the 19866 month of 4/11 to 11/11. 6 1355/28.8.12 Gopal Krushna Badu Mohapatra 47472 7 1396/29.8.12 Mahabir Dash and others for the 12250 month of 4/11 to 11/11 8 1438/31.8.12 Krushna Ch. Panda and others for 7198 the month of 4/11 to 11/11 Total 383930 In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violating the rule-14 and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule-1968. Hence the amount of Rs.383930/- is held under objection till production of the records.
14.19 - In admisible deduction of Vat on Voucher No-1329/25.8.12 OSP-15
(1) On checking of Vr. No. 1329/25.8.12, it was seen that a sum of Rs. 9000/- has been paid to “Sports World” Sarada Market Complex, Bank Street, Jajpur Road, Jajpur towards cost of white Cap with Nila Chakra Logo printing. File No.XXXVII-27/12 (Purchase File) was asked for production to audit for verification.But the same was not produced to audit till close of audit. Hence the expenditure of Rs 9000.00 is held under objection till production of the same.
Further, it is seen that there was no Tin No found in the Money Receipt No 585/27.7.12 and deduction of 5 % i.e 450 of Rs. 9000 VAT in the aforesaid voucher which could not be verified by audit.The reason of purchase made from the Jajpur instead of Puri was asked through objection memo no-7/1.7.14 But no clarification has been furnished by the local authority.
Hence,in absence of Tin no the payment of vat for Rs. 450/- is suggested for recovery from Sri Bimal Kumar Kamala; UDC Genral Misc. section and Sri Saroj Kumar Ray; Asst Administrator .
In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority. Hence the total expenditure of Rs.9000.00/- is held under objection till production of the same.
90 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
14.20 - Unauthorised ration of mobile phone and recharge voucher to Sri Dhiren Kanta Nayak, Driver:- (OSP-245)
Audit reference:- File No.XXXIX-1/14 on the subject “Mobile Telephone”
A) Referred the application of Sri Dhiren Kanta Nayak, Driver at p27/c in the said file,in which he has reported that on 10.8.13,the mobile bearing No.9437423650 was lost , while he was in the market no-1, BBSR.The said mobile phone was allotted to him by the temple office. Sri Nayak has lodged a FIR in capital thana on 11.8.13. He also has produced a copy of FIR in the office and claimed another one from the office. In the note sheet at p282 to 283/N, the Dy. Administrator, Finance has ordered to purchase a new mobile for Sri Nayak without recovery of the cost of the lost mobile. In this context,it is pertinent to state that the driver was not in official duty while he was in market.So he is solely responsible for loss of mobile and the cost there of is recoverable from him. Further the copy of FIR seems not to be realistic as the I/C has received the FIR on 10.8.13 where as Sri Nayak has lodged the FIR on 11.8.13. Without the assessment of real fact, the authority has order to not to realize the cost there of .Suitable answer from the local authority is solicited , failing which the minimum cost of the lost mobile amounting to Rs.2000.00 would be treated as loss to the temple fund.
B) On verification of payment against recharge voucher produced by Sri Nayak, it came to notice that during the years of audit, Sri Nayak has been paid Rs.3600.00 @ 150.00/month.As per codal provision , the employee in post of Driver is not eligible to avail mobile facility. The local authority is to explain whether he has got spl. Approval of the Govt.in this concern or not. Non-production of compliance will lead the amount to be treated loss to the temple.
In response to audit objection memo the Local Authority replied that "FIR has been lodged with police and police report is awaited for taking further action on the loss of mobile as per OGFR. As the mobile was used by Sri Dhiren Kanta Nayak, Driver for bonafide purposes under orders of Competent Authority, cost of recharge vouchers was also paid to him for safely and security of the authority. Driving in odd hours the driver has supplied the mobile. It is not admitted in audit and suggested for recovery from Sri D.K.Nayak, Driver.
In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violating the rule-14 and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule 1968. Hence the amount of Rs.5600( Rs.2000+3600) is suggested for recovery from Sri Dhirenkanta Nayak, Driver.
At the time of exit conference the office order of Chief Administrator has been produced to audit for verification which is convincing .Hence the para is dropped.
14.21 - Sub Inadmissible expenditure without approval of tour particular OSO-295-297
Audit Ref: Cash payment vouchers and cash book
While checking of the Cash payment vouchers with reference to cash book it was found that a sum of Rs.99134/- has been paid to Sri Raghunath Prasad Mishra, N.T and Sri Kasinath Panda, C.O.(details given below) towards hire charges of vehicle for collection of Rajbhag. But in support of such expenditure approval of competent authority and approved tour diary was not made available to audit in spite of several personal requests. In absence of the approved tour diary and tour particulars with due approval of competent authority, the above said payment is not admissible in audit.
Vehicle No. Date of Travel Place of Travel K.M Travel Hire charges Vr.No/Date led claimed(Oil bill and hire charge) OR-O7G-139 28.2.13 Gurunthi, Khairaput, Khandirabali, Panigad etc 95 k.M 882.00 282/4.5.13 36 1 -do- 27.2.13 Belagunth, Bhanganjanagar, Jilundi, Bhamundi,Deng 154 1181.00 -do- 36 apodar etc
-do- 26.2.13 Thengadhar,Madhupali,etc 110 K.M 958.00 -do- 36 -do- 25.2.13 Bhabarada, Hansrali,Tentulia,Khajuria etc 130 k.M 1060.00 -do- 36 -do- 23.2.13 Patalasingh,Pasiri etc 170 K.M 1263.00 -do- 36 -do- 22.2.13 Gurunthi,Patapur,Sahapur etc 170 K.M 1263.00 -do- 36 -do- 19.2.13 Hindol,Raipur,Saljar, etc 150 K.M 1161.00 -do- 36 -do- 18.2.13 Gurunthi, Chandipodar etc 100 K.M 907.00 -do- 36 -do- 16.2.13 Badagumuka,Bhabandi, Baghala etc 120 K.M 1002.00 -do- 36 -do- 14.2.13 Khalikote, Bhejiput, Belapada etc 135 K.M 1078.00 -do- 36 -do- 13.2.13 Ganjam, 140 K.M 1103.00 -do- 36 -do- 12.2.13 Rambha, 120K.M 1002.00 -do- 36 -do- 11.2.13 Karakhandi, Pochilima etc 165 K.M 1228.00 -do- 36
91 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
-do- 8.2.13 Jagannathpatana, Raigada,Ganjam, Belapada etc 160 K.M 1203.00 -do- 36 -do- 7.2.13 Darini,Matiatola etc 165 K.M 1228.00 -do- 36 -do- 6.2.13 Maheswarpur 160 K.M 1203.00 -do- 36 -do- 5.2.13 Rambha,Bhejiput etc 170 K.M 1253.00 -do- 36 -do- 4.2.13 Hinjilikat, Sheragada etc 190 K.M 1354.00 -do- 36 -do- 30.1.13 Dhabalpur, Patharmundi etc 130 K.M 1053.00 -do- 36 -do- 29.1.13 Sabulia, Rambha etc 140 K.M 1103.00 -do- 36 -do- 28.1.13 Tentulia, Nimisola etc 180 K.M 1304.00 -do- 36 -do- 25.1.13 Rambha, Bikrampur etc 160 K.M 1203.00 -do- 36 -do- 8.1.13 Dhinkisala, Gobindapur etc 150 K.M 1153.00 -do- 36 -do- 13.2.13 Purusottampur, Kodala etc 162 K.M 1222.00(400+822) JV-32/4.5.13 -do- 1.3.13 Nilakanthapur, Saranapur,etc 210 K.M 1466.00(400+1066) -do- 36 -do- 2.3.13 Jamini, Patharpunji etc 185 K.M 1339.00(400+939) -do- 36 -do- 4.3.13 154 K.M 1181.00(400+781) -do- 36 -do- 5.3.13 Baligadar, Ramgad etc 172 K.M 1273.00(400+873) -do- 36 -do- 6.3.13 Thengadhar, Motabadi etc 165 K.M 1237.00(400+837) -do- 36 -do- 7.3.13 Rambha, Phasula etc 192 K.M 1374.00(400+974) -do- 36 -do- 8.3.13 Nuapali, Chikity etc 168 K.M 1252.00(400+852) -do- 36 -do- 14.3.13 Bhusunda, Barsinghetc 151 K.M 1166.00(400+766) -do- 36 -do- 15.3.13 Chandipodar, Paliama etc 167 K.M 1247.00(400+847) -do- 36 -do- 16.3.13 Ch.pada, Khanduru etc 172 K.M 1278.00(400+878) -do- 36 -do- 17.3.13 Padmabati, Mahanadapur etc 164 K.M 1232.00(400+832) -do- 36 -do- 18.3.13 Sumantapur, Bisamgiri 172 K.M 1298.00(400+898) -do- 36 -do- 19.3.13 Ch.pada, etc 152 K.M 1171.00(400+771) -do- 36 -do- 20.3.13 Paliama, Badakhali etc 127 K.M 1044.00(400+644) -do- 36 -do- 21.3.13 Mandapali, Mathura etc 173 K.M 1278.00(400+878) -do- 36 -do- 22.3.13 Gumma, etc 152 K.M 1171.00(400+771) -do- 36 -do- 23.3.13 Kendupodar etc 122 K.M 1019.00(400+619) -do- 36 -do- 24.3.13 Baisipola etc 130 K.M 1060.00(400+660) -do- 36 -do- 25.3.13 Patpur etc 210 K.M 1477.00(400+1077) -do- 36 -do- 26.3.13 Dengapodar etc 125 K.M 1041.00(400+641) -do- 36 -do- 4.12.12 Taranti, Rampali etac 160 K.M 1194.00(400+794) 841/26.2.13 36 -do- 14.12.12 Bhismagiri, Gopalpur etc 120 K.M 995.00(400+595) -do- 36 -do- 18.12.12 Khalikote, Gopalpur etc 125 K.M 1318.00(400+918) -do- 36 -do- 9.4.13 Chatrapur, Ganjam etc 190K.M 1374.00(400+974) -do- 130 -do- 10.413 Khalikote, Tentulia etc 182 K.M 1333.00(400+933) -do- 130 -do- 11.4.13 Chatrapur, Punad, Athagarh etc 170 K.M 1272.00(400+872) -do- 130 -do- 12.4.13 Bhutasarsing, Kankarada etc 153 K.M 1185.00(400+785) -do- 130 -do- 13.4.13 Deulagedi, Narendrapur etc 148 K.M 1159.0(400+759) -do- 130 -do- 15.4.13 Burupada, Raipur etc 140 K.M 1118.00(400+718) -do- 130 -do- 16.4.13 Hansrali, Titikhandi, etc 142 K.M 1128.00(400+728) -do- 130 -do- 17.4.13 Raipur, Balighai etc 167 K.M 1256.00(400+856) -do- 130 -do- 18.4.13 Kanisi, Patpur etc 145 K.M 1144.00(400+744) -do- 130 -do- 24.4.13 Kabisuryanagar, Polosora etc 175 K.M 1297.00(400+897) -do- 130 -do- 29.4.13 Kodala, Polsora etc 191 K.M 1379.00(400+979) -do- 130 -do- 1.5.13 Gothasa etc 154 K.M 1190.00(400+790) -do- 130 -do- 10.5.13 Badaagula, Govindapur etc 185 K.M 1349.00(400+949) 1262/13.8.13 130 -do- 7.5.13 Asika, Purusottampur etc 182 K.M 1332.00(400+932) -do- 130 -do- 28.5.13 Digapahandi, Balikha etc 170 K.M 1272.00(400+872) -do- 130 -do- 27.5.13 Asika, K,Sumantapur etc 175 K.M 1297.00(400+897) -do- 130 -do- 6.6.13 Chikiti ,Karakhandi etc, 180 K.M 1323.00(400+923) -do- 130 -do- 5.6.13 Laudia, Tumuda etc 168 K.M 1261.00(400+861) -do- 130 -do- 11.6.13 Patala, Antarpada etc 210 K.M 1512.00(400+1112) -do- 130 -do- 10.6.13 Hinjilikuda, Amrutulya etc 237 k.M 1654.00(400+1254) -do- 130 -do- 16.6.13 Lathi, Manasila etc 165 K.M 1293.00(400+893) -do- 130 24.6.13 Khalikote, Hinjili etc 223 k.M 1580.00(400+1180) 3239/33.14 7.8.13 Baguda, Jagannathpur etc 160 K.M 1247.00(400+847) -do- 12.8.13 Deobhumi, nalabenta etc 172 K.M 1310.00(400+910) 3239/33.14 1.7.13 Ichapur, Kania etc 240K.M. 1670.00(400+1270) 3239/33.14 KASINATH PANDA, Co-ordination Officer OR-22-9644 8.3.13 Jagira, Rahanj etc 120 K.M 1079 13.3.13 Ranital,Tagira etc 135 K.M 1164 17.3.13 Rahanj, Tagira 142 K.M 1203 20.3.13 Bahadalpur, Tagira etc 145 K.M 1220 22.3.13 Bahadalpur, Tagira etc 127 1118
92 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
27.3.13 Bahadalpur Tagira etc 160 1305 8.4.13 Bahadalpur Tagira etc 140 1192 25.6.13 Rahanj, Tagira etc 130 1135 26.6.13 Tagira, Bahadalpur etc 160 1305 Total: 99134.00 In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority. Hence the amount of Rs. 99134.00 is held under objection till production of the above approval order.
14.22 - Sub: Inadmissible payment to unauthorised persons .
Voucher (Cash)No-2473/6.12.13 Amount involved-7380.00 paid towards Aswina Solapuja
On verification of the cash voucher, it is found that a sanction orders bearing no.3047 dtd 26/11/2013 has superseded a previous one bearing the same no. and date .in which an amount of Rs. 7380 has been sanctioned for disbursement among the sevayats as detailed in the following table towards their cooperation in completion of Sankhudi Bhoga of Aswina Shola Puja from 10/10/13 to 12/10/13.Sri Krushna Chandra Pujapanda was authorised to disburse the same among the sevayats. But it is seen on the voucher that in stead of the table mentioned sevayats, some other sevayats named Krupasindhu Pujapanda Samanta, Bibhuti Bhusan Pujapanda Samanta, Ramanath Pujapanda, Krushna Chandra Pujapanda Samanta (twice), Radhagovinda Pujapanda Samanta (twice), Gopal Krushna Pujapanda and Harihar Pujapanda are found to give their signatures as the recipients of the amount.
In absence of office order to pay to the above stated unauthorised persons is treated as inadmissible payment .
In response to the audit objection memo the local authority remain silent Hence, the payment of total amount of Rs.7380.00 is suggested for recovery from Sri Krushna Chandra Pujapanda , who disbursed the amount among unauthorised persons .
Sl. No. Date Name of the Sevayat as per Sanctioned Date of Payment sanction order. Amount 1 2 3 4 5 1 10/10/13 Maha Sapta Sudarshan Pujapanda 820 10/04/2014 mi Biswanath Pujapanda 820 N.A. Gopal Krushna Pujapanda 820 22/04/2014 2 11/10/2013 Maha Asta Sibanarayan Pujapanda 820 24/12/2013 mi Biswanath Pujapanda 820 16/03/2014 Bijayketan Pujapanda 820 31/07/2014 3 12/10/2013 Maha Nav Laxmi Narayan Pujapanda 820 14/10/2014 ami Bhagirathi Pujapanda 820 N.A. Bijayketan Pujapanda 820 31/07/2014 TOTAL 7380
14.23 - Irregularities in hiring of vehicle(OSPO-275)
File No. XXII - 12/12, File No. XXIII – 2/12
Audit Criteria: Letter no. 34085/Fin –CODAudit Ref:-MV-0007-2012 dtd 29.09.2012
While checking the paid vouchers (Cash) it is noticed that during the period 2012 - 13 & 2013 – 14 vehicles no. OR-16A-9596 & OR-02-AD-2155 were used for official purposes on hire basis and also paid @ Rs 9000.00 & Rs 7500.00 p.m. respectively. After going through the above said files it is seen that vehicle no. OR-16A-9596 was manufactured in Nov’2003 (as per R.C. book) and vehicle no. OR-02-AD-2155 was manufactured in 2004 (R.C. book not available).
As per the above said letterLetter no. 34085/Fin –COD Audit Ref:-MV-0007-2012 dtd 29.09.2012, Annexure- I, the vehicle shall not be more than 3 years from the date of initial registration for hiring of private vehicle for official use by the offices of the State Govt. In contravention to this the Temple Administration hired the vehicles which were more than 3 years old.
93 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
The data available from the above said files is given below:
Vehicle No. Type of Vehicle Date of Registration Date of Manufacture Remarks OR-16A-9596 Marshall 9.12.03 11/2003 As per R.C. book OR-02-AD-2155 Ambassador not available 2004 R.C. book not available Hence the hire charges of the above vehicles from the month of 10/12 to 3/14 monthly hire charges of Rs.9000.00 and Rs.7500.00, a sum of RS.237000.00 (9000x18=162000 and 7500x10=75000) have been paid to the vehicle owner during the year 2012-13 and 2013-14 which violate the Govt. Rule which cannot be admitted in audit.
In response to the audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violating the rule 14 and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule-1968. Hence the amount of Rs. 237000.00 was held under objection .
However, at the time of exit conference the local authority has produced the records for verification which is convincing.Hence,the para is dropped.
14.24 - Inadmissble consumption of Fuel
Audit Ref: Log book of vehicle no. OR-02-2155 and file no. XXIII 2/12
While checking the above mentioned records it has come to notice that during the period of audit i.e., 2012 – 13 & 2013 – 14 the above mentioned vehicle ran for 18134 km thereby consuming 1511 L of diesel @ 12 km per litre. As per the log book, the vehicle was used by the Controlling Officer as well as by other officials for different purposes.
A year wise bifurcation of the use of the said vehicle by the controlling officer is tabulated below.
Period Total Total fuel Use by the Controlling Officer Use for other officers distance travelled consumption (in Distance Fuel consumption (in L) Distance Fuel consumption (in L) (in km) L) (in km) (in km) 2012 – 13 13550 1129.1 3612 301 9938 828.1 2013 – 14 4584 382 - - 4584 382 TOTAL 1210.1 (The above data is as per the log book produced to audit by the local authority for verification)
It is clearly mentioned in the related file i.e., file no. XXIII 2/12 that, “however as and when required, the said vehicle can be used by other officers to proceed to CTC/ BBSR or other places for official purpose with prior approval of the authority”. But from the concerned records it is found that at no instance approval of the competent authority was obtained before using the said vehicle by other officials . Hence it bounds the audit to raise finger on the authenticity of the expenditure incurred by use of the concerned vehicle by other officers/officials . Audit asked through objection memo to the local authority explain why the incurring expenses towards cost of diesel would not be treated as inadmissible.In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violating the rule 14 and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule-1968.. Hence, Sri Bimal Kumar Kamala section in-charge of General and Misc Section and Sri Saroj Kumar Roy(Asst Administrator) are held responsible for inadmissible expenditure of Rs 54454.50 towards cost of fuel (@Rs 45 per L for 1210 ltr. Hence recovery is necessitated from them.
14.25 - Meeting /Refreshment Expenses:(OSP-52-59 and 281-282)
On checking of Cash payment vouchers w.r.t Cash Book for the year 2012-13 and 2013-14, it is seen that a sum of Rs. 114745(Rs49289.00 +Rs.65456) has been spent towards meeting expenses during the year 2012-13 and 2013-14. In support of such payment, sanctioned file, meeting proceedings, no. of member attended meeting on the below mentioned dates asked through objection memo to be clarified to audit. The details of cash payments are furnished below;-
For the year 2012-13
Sl.No. Vr.No/Date Paid to whom Amount Admissible as Excess Finance Deptt Memorandum @ 2000/- P.M 1. 1284/22.8.12 Sukanta Ku. Mishra towards meeting expenses on 3936.00 2000.00 1936.00
94 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
17.7.12 2. 1922/8.10.12 S .R. Malia towards M.C expenses on 17.9.12 4321.00 2000.00 2321 3. 2142/2.11.12 Susanta Ranjan Malia towards M.C expenses on 4311.00 2000.00 2311.00 18.10.12
Paper Home -- Rs.300 .00 (pen)
Joymakali-- Rs.2465.00 (Tiffin,Kinlywater, steam cake)
The Grand-- Rs.1211.00 (panir pakoda, vada)
Hand receipt-- Rs.60.00 (juice)
Rs. 175.00 (coffee Biscuit)
Rs. 100.00 Gujrati, labang) 4. 2799/18.1.13 Rashmi Ranjan Malia towards M.C expenditure on 9300.00 2000.00 7300.00 22.12.12
Shree paper Rs. 300.00(pen)
Kaju -- Rs. 1050.00
Kinly water pack –Rs.425.00
Coffee --Rs.200.00
Biscuit,Gujrati Rs. 200.00
Apple and orange-- Rs. 325.00
Ghee arna, Khechudi etc Rs. 6800.00 5. 3445/30.3.13 Aswini Ku. Acharya towards the refreshment expenses for2000.00 2000.00 -- auction of querries of Temple at Khurda District. 6. 3477/31.3.13 Susanta Ranjan Mallia towards M.C expenditure on 4100.00 2000.00 2100.00 7.3.13
Tiffin Rs. 600.00
Pen Rs.300.00
Water bottle Rs. 540.00
Kismis, apple, grape Rs. 690.00
Biscuit, Gujrati Rs.250.00
Coffee Rs. 320.00
Kaju Rs. 1400.00 7. 3478/31.3.13 Harihar DasMohapatra towards M.C, 21321.00 2000.00 19321.00 Finance Sub-Commiittee meeting on7.3.13, 6.3.13 and 23.3.13.
Sweets Rs. 735.00
Water, Tissue paper Rs. 241.00
Tea and Coffee Rs. 320.00
Salt, Mirchi Rs. 225.00
Khechudi, ghee arna Rs.19800.00 Total: 49289.00 14000.00 35289.00 2013-14
95 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Sl.No. Vr.No/Date Paid to whom Amount Admissible as Excess Finance Deptt Memorandum @ 2000/- P.M 1. 1284/22.8.12 Sukanta Ku. Mishra towards meeting expenses on 3936.00 2000.00 1936.00 17.7.12 2. 1922/8.10.12 S .R. Malia towards M.C expenses on 17.9.12 4321.00 2000.00 2321 3. 2142/2.11.12 Susanta Ranjan Malia towards M.C expenses on 4311.00 2000.00 2311.00 18.10.12
Paper Home -- Rs.300 .00 (pen)
Joymakali-- Rs.2465.00 (Tiffin,Kinlywater, steam cake)
The Grand-- Rs.1211.00 (panir pakoda, vada)
Hand receipt-- Rs.60.00 (juice)
Rs. 175.00 (coffee Biscuit)
Rs. 100.00 Gujrati, labang) 4. 2799/18.1.13 Rashmi Ranjan Malia towards M.C expenditure on 9300.00 2000.00 7300.00 22.12.12
Shree paper Rs. 300.00(pen)
Kaju -- Rs. 1050.00
Kinly water pack –Rs.425.00
Coffee --Rs.200.00
Biscuit,Gujrati Rs. 200.00
Apple and orange-- Rs. 325.00
Ghee arna, Khechudi etc Rs. 6800.00 5. 3445/30.3.13 Aswini Ku. Acharya towards the refreshment expenses for2000.00 2000.00 -- auction of querries of Temple at Khurda District. 6. 3477/31.3.13 Susanta Ranjan Mallia towards M.C expenditure on 4100.00 2000.00 2100.00 7.3.13
Tiffin Rs. 600.00
Pen Rs.300.00
Water bottle Rs. 540.00
Kismis, apple, grape Rs. 690.00
Biscuit, Gujrati Rs.250.00
Coffee Rs. 320.00
Kaju Rs. 1400.00 7. 3478/31.3.13 Harihar DasMohapatra towards M.C, 21321.00 2000.00 19321.00 Finance Sub-Commiittee meeting on7.3.13, 6.3.13 and 23.3.13.
Sweets Rs. 735.00
Water, Tissue paper Rs. 241.00
Tea and Coffee Rs. 320.00
Salt, Mirchi Rs. 225.00
96 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Khechudi, ghee arna Rs.19800.00 Total: 49289.00 14000.00 35289.00 2013-14
Vr.No./Date Paid to whom Amount Admissible as Excess Finance Deptt Memorandum @ 2000/- P.M 251/2.5.13 Susanta Ranjan Mallia towards meeting expenses 4100 2000 2100 261/3.5.13 Suryanarayab Mohapatra towards Managing 17602 2000 15602 Committee meeting on 20.4.13 1240/12.8.13 Susanta Ranjan Mallia towards Managing 10095 2000 8095 Committee meeting on 17.6.13 and 3.7.13 1422/31.8.13 Susanta Ranjan Mallia towards Managing 5270 2000 3270 Committee meeting on 17.8.13 885/9.7.12 Susanta Ranjan Mallia towards Managing 7722 2000 5722 Committee meeting on 25.5.12 and 13.6.12 3080/14.2.14 Meeting expenses 20667 2000 18667 Total: 65456 12000 53456 Monetary Ceiling limit on expenditure towards meeting/refreshment expenses is limited to Rs. 2000.00 per month vide Finance Department (Office Memorandum) No. 31957/F/Bt-I-II/2011 Dt. 20.7.11.But in this case limitation is exceeding to the extent of Rs.88745.00(Rs 35289.00+Rs.53456.00) over and above the admissibility of Rs.26000.00 (Rs 14000.00+Rs.12000.00). The Local Authority was asked to comply the reason of excess expenditure of Rs 62745.00 ( Rs. 88745.00-26000.00) towards Meeting /Refreshment Expenses.In absence of the attendance register of the officials those were attended meeting the above expenditure can not be treated as admissible and suggested for recovery.
In response to audit objection memo the local authority replied that "managing committee meeting expenses have been incurred against estimated amount, on realistic basis as against budget provisions. As these are of contingent nature it may not be considered as nugatory or improper expenditure. Expenditure has been incurred at par with Rule 163 of OGFR. The excess amount of Rs. 88745.00 towards meeting expenses violates the Finance Department (Office Memorandum) No.31957/FBt-III/2011 date 20.7.11. Hence, it is suggested for recovery from Sri Harihara Das Mohapatra, Accountant and Sri Purna Chandra Jena, Dy. Administrator (F) and Sri Tripati Nanda Dash Dy. Administrator (F) equally.
The reply of the local authority is convincing on verification of connected records produced at the time of exit conference .Hence the para is dropped.
14.26 - Inadmissible payment of TA (OSP-71)
Excess payment on Voucher No-815/dated 11.12.12
On scrutiny of the above voucher, a sum of Rs 2030.00 was paid in excess towards TA to Sri Prachi Sourav Pattaink, CA for travel by office car instead of his own car which is not admissible as per OTA rule, G O No- cs-ii-5-2011-16638/F dt 2.4.11 entitlement of Road Mileage allowance inside the state for journey on tour by own car, Taxi &auto rickshaw for state Govt employees. Detail calculation is furnished below;-
Date Mode of journey TA admissible TA paid as road mileage Excess paid 25.9.12 By office car No Fare only DA@140 1260.00 1120.00 17.9.12 -Do- -DO- 910.00 910.00
Total 2030.00 In violation of OTA rules Rs 2030.00 was paid in excess towards inadmissible TA to Sri P.S. Pattaink CA. which was asked through objection memo But no reply was furnished by the Local authority .Hence ,A sum of Rs 2030.00 is suggested for recovery from Sri P.S.Pattaink C.A. failing which Sri Hari hara.Das MoahapatraAccountant and Sri Purna Chandra Jena Dy Administrator (F)are considered as responsible.
14.27 -
97 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
The subject matter dealt in this para is shifted to para 4.
14.28 - SubFictitious payment of Old Age Pension/ Senior Sevayat Pension OSP-286
Audit Ref: Cash book for the year 2013 – 14, Cash payment vouchers, and acquittance roll of OAP & Senior Sevayat Pension.
While checking the Old Age Pension paid & Senior Sevayat Pension vouchers w.r.t. acquittance roll and cash book it is noticed that Rs 500.00 has been paid to Sri Padmanav Khuntia for the month of Feb’14 vide Vr. No. 3476 dtd 25.03.14. As seen from the acquittance roll the payment was acknowledged by the recipient on 25.09.14. Hence the payment on 25.03.14 seems to be fictitious.
Similarly Rs 1000.00 has been paid to Sri Krushna Ch. Mohapatra, Sr. Sevayat vide Vr. No. 3483 A dtd 26.03.14 for the month of June’13. As against this payment no acknowledgement of the recipient is available. In absence of the recipients' acknowledgement the payment can not be treated as admissible.
In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority. Hence the Rs. 1500 is suggested for recovery from Smt. Sujata Mahapatra, Cashier.
14.29 - Sub- Excess and undue payment to the Maharanas, Bhois, Kamaras, Karatis employed in structure of chariots OSP-278-280
Audit criteria:- 1) File No.XII 50/13
Referred the O/O No.8828/1.6.12, No.7971/dt4.7.13 & o/o No.7691/26.6.13 in respect of payment to the Maharanas, Bhois, Kamaras, Karatis employed in structure of chariots. As in O/Os, all the employees are scheduled to be paid for their engagement in structure of chariots in the manner and mode as explained in following table.
Date of wage payment O.O No./date File No Wage @ 30.5.12 to 4.6.12 8828/4.6.12 XII-50/13 1 and ½ 10.6.12 to 19.6.12 9286(5)/10.6.12 XII-50/13 1 and ½ 20.6.13 to 23.6.13 7691/26.6.13 XII-50/13 1 and ½ 3.7.13 to 8.7.13 7971/4.7.13 XII-50/13 1 and ½ But as seen from the cash book some payments are made towards structure of chariot beyond the above order@1 &1/2 wage rate as detailed below, as a result of which a sum of Rs 77,955.00 paid in excess over and above admissible rate of wage.
Moharanas employed for Wage Paid through wage due Excess and Date against which Vr.No/Date making the chariots cash vr. undue payment undue payment is made. Taladhwaja Moharana 230 X1 ½ X2 =690 230X1X2=460 9.7.13 1034/16.7.13
220X1 ½ X2=660 220X1X2=440 2865
210X1 ½ X23=7245
210X1X23=4830
8595 5730
Debadalan Mohan 230X1 ½ X1=345 230X1X1=230 2640 9.7.13 1034/16.7.13
220X1 ½ X1=330 220X1X1=220
210X1 ½ X23=7245 210X1X23=4830
7920 5280 Nandighosh Mohan 230X1 ½ X1=345 230X1X1=230 3105 9.7.13 1034/16.7.13
220X1 ½ X1=330 220X1X1=220
98 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
220X1 1/2X24=7920 210X1X24=5040
8595 5490
Karati 215X1 ½=322 215X1=215 422 9.7.13 1034/16.7.13
210X1 1/2X3=945 210X3=630
1267 845
Kamar 210X1 ½ X3=945 210X3=630 1729 9.7.13 1034/16.7.13
203X1 ½ X14=4256 203X14=2842
5201 3472
Taladhwaja bhoi 210X2 ½ X2=1050 210X2=420 7638 9.7.13 1034/16.7.13
195X2 ½ X24=11688 195X24=4680
12738 5100 Debadolan bhoi 215X2 ½ X1=537 215X1=215 7353 9.7.13 1034/16.7.13
210X2 ½ X1=525 210X1=210
195X2 ½ X23=11212.50 195X23=4485
12274.50(Paid 4910 Rs.12263.00
Nandighosh bhoi 213X2 ½ X1=532 213X1=213 7642 9.7.13 1034/16.7.13
210X2 ½ X1=525 210X1=210
195X2 ½ X24=11688 195X24=4680
12745 5103 Taldwaja Rupala 158X1 ½ X8=1896 158X8=1264 1384 9.7.13 1034/16.7.13
Debadolan Rupalau 158X1 ½ X4=948 158X4=632
Nandighosh Rupala 158X1 ½ X5=1185 158X5=790
Pani wala 83X1 ½ X1=124 83X1=83
4153 2769 Taladhwaja 163x2x26=8476 163x26=4238 4238 28.6.12 1102/1.8.12 Debadolana Rath 163x2x25=8150 163x25=4075 4075 28.6.12 1102/1.8.12 Nandighosh 163x2x26=8476 163x26=4238 4238 28.6.12 1102/1.8.12 Debadolana Rath 163x1 ½ x25=6100 163x25=4075 2025 3.7.12 1102/1.8.12 Nandighosh 163x1 ½ x25=6100 163x25=4075 2025 3.7.12 1102/1.8.12 Taladhwaja maharana 175x1 ½ x26 nos=6812 4550 2262 20.6.12 822/28.6.12 Debadolana Rath maharana 175x1 ½ x24 nos=6201 4200 2001 20.6.12 822/28.6.12 Nandighosh Maharana 175x1 ½ x27 nos=7074 4725 2349 20.6.12 822/28.6.12 Kamar 169x1 ½ x14nos=3542 2366 1176 20.6.12 822/28.6.12 163x2 ½ x26 nos=10582 4238 6344 20.6.12 822/28.6.12
Taladhwaja Bhoi Debadolana Bhoi 163x 2 ½ x25 nos=10175 4075 6100 20.6.12 822/28.6.12 Nandighosh Bhoi 163x2 ½ x26 nos=10582 4238 6344 20.6.12 822/28.6.12 Total: 77955.00
In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violating the rule 14
99 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule-1968. Hence the amount of Rs. 77955.00 is suggested recovery from Sri Sudarsan Mekap, Care Taker failing which .Sri Purna Chandra Jena Dy. Administrator (Finance) and sri Hari hara Das Mohapatra, Accountant are consider as responsible.
At the time of exit conference, the local authority has produced the records as well as office order for verification,which is convincing and the para so dropped.
14.30 - Fictitious expenditure in disguise of payment of wages
Ref:1. Temporary bill register with ref to. expenditure voucher (Cash) no. 2757 dtd 4/1/2014
Voucher No-2757 Amount involved-10581.00
On verification of the above expenditure voucher it is noticed that Rs. 10581.00 is shown to have been paid to Sudarshan Pani towards his daily wages from 1/3/2013/to 20/5/2013. With the reference to Temporary bill Register page no.9, But , there is no bill in support of the said payment . It is noteworthy to mention here that there are most of the cash vouchers paid without passed for payment made by the competent authority to authorize the payment. In this case also no pass for payment has been made and no acknowledgement is also found in the said voucher and in the temporary bill Register . But the expenditure is booked in the cash book on dtd 4/1/2014. In absence of supporting authentic documents as well as acknowledgment the said expenditure could not be admitted as genuine payment .Hence,the amount of Rs 10581.00 is suggested for recovery from Smt Sujata Mohapatra Cashier.
14.31 - Inadmissible payment of xerox charges:(OSP-268)
Xerox charges:
While checking the cash voucher for theyear 2012-13, it is found that a total sum of Rs.12594/-has been spent towards Xerox charges on different dates as detail given below. The temple office has its own Xerox machine and a sum of Rs.1500/- has been spent towards repair of Xerox machine vide Vr.No,2264/16.11.12. Hence, the expenditure made towards Xerox can not be admitted in audit.
2884/31.1.13 Rs.1500
2661/31.12.12 Rs.1699
2511/13.12.12 Rs.1844
2442/5.12.12 Rs.1505
2557/16.12.12 Rs.2435
2704/5.1.13 Rs.3611
------
Total: Rs.12594
------
The local authority is requested to justify the reason of such expenditure & the Xerox made from outside the temple office. Stock Register need be produced to audit.
In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority. Hence the amount of Rs.12594 is suggested for recovery from Sri Purna Chandra Jana Dy. Administrator(F) and Sri Harihara das Mohapatra ,Accountant.are considered as responsible.
100 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
14.32 - Double payment made to sri Raghunath Prasad Mishra, N.T Berhampur circle towards hire charges of vehicle OSP-267
While checking the cash voucher with reference to connected records it was found that hand receipts of hire charges of vehicle has been submitted by Sri. R.N.Mishra, Naib Tahasildar for the period from dt 8.1.13 to 28.3.13 used for collection of Rajbhag of Berhampur circle vide vouchers as detailed below.
Vr.No./Date Bill No- Advance paid Adjusted Date of journey K.M travelled Claim for hirecharges
282/4.5.13 44/12.4.13 20,000 Rs26,145/- 13.2.13 140 K.M 1103 JV-32/4.5.13 157/2.5.13 35,000 Rs25,826/- 13.2.13 162 K.M 1222 On cross verification of the above two vouchers it is found that Sri. Mishra has claimed hire charges for 13.2.13 in both the vouchers. Resulting payment for 13.2.13 towards hire charges of vehicle has been made twice to Sri.Mishra. The payment made in the second voucher i.e Vr.No.JV-32/4.5.13 for 13.2.13 amounting to Rs.1222.00 is not admitted in audit.
Further, it is seen that Sri R.P. Mishra, Niab Tahasidar, has submitted hand written receipt of performing his journey for collection of Rajbhag of Berhampur in stead of producing log book of the hired vehicle used by him. There is no certificate of approval of competent authority is found in the hand receipt regarding his perforforming tour on that date submitted by him. Hence, the excess payment of Rs 1222.00 has been suggested for recovery from Sri R.N.Mishra.N.T. Berhampur. In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violating the rule 14 and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule-1968.Hence the amount of Rs.1222.00 is suggested for recovery from Sri. Raghunath Prasad Mishra.from Sri Harihara Das Mohapatra, Accountant and Sri Purna Chandra Jena, Dy. Administrator (F) are equally responsible.
14.33 - Sub:Excess consumptiom of fuel over & above the ceiling limit (OSP-273-274)
Sub:Excess consumption of fuel over & above the ceiling limit
Audit Ref: Log books of Vehicle no. OR-13C 4943 and vehicle no.OR-13A-1843
Audit Criteria:Office Memorandum No. 10954 dtd 14.03.2001 of Department of Finance, Govt. of Odisha
As per the above mentioned order regarding ban on purchase of new vehicle/ restriction of consumption of fuel the ceiling limit of fuel for Heads of Deptt. / Deptt. of Govt. is fixed as 5Ltr per working day. In contravention to this memorandum the Temple Administration Office allowed to consume excess fuel of 624 Ltr (458.5 Ltr + 165.5 Ltr) to the vehicle no. OR-13C 4943 and vehicle no.OR-13A-1843 which detail is furnished below.
Vehicle no. OR-13C 4943
Month Admissibility of fuel as per govt order Fuel consumed Excess April-12 30 litres (6 days) 82 litres (6 days) 52 litres May-12 45 litres (9 days) 117.5litres (9 days) 72.5. June-12 60 litres (12 days) 134.5litres (12 days) 74.5 July-12 40litres (8 days) 95litres (8 days) 55 Aug-12 30litres (6 days) 118litres (6 days) 88 Sept-12 45litres (9 days) 116litres (9 days) 71 Nov-12 15litres (3 days) 32litres (3 days) 17 Dec-12 5litres (1 day) 15litres (1 day) 10 Feb-13 10litres (2 days) 14.5litres (2 days) 4.5 May-13 5litres (1 day) 14 litres 9 June-13 5litres (1 day) 7.5 litres 2.5 July-13 5litres (1 day) 7.5 litres 2.5 Total: 59 days 753.5 litres 458.5 litres
Vehicle No.OR-13A-1843
Month Admissibility of fuel as per govt order Fuel consumed Excess May-12 5litres (1 day) 14 litres (1 day) 9 July-12 5litres (1 day) 14.5 9.5
101 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Nov-12 10litres (2 days) 28 18 Dec-12 10litres (2 days) 31 21 Jan-13 35 litres (7 days) 111 76 Feb-13 5litres (1 day) 15 10 Mar-13 10litres (2 days) 26 16 Nov-13 5litres (1 day) 20 15 Total: 165.5 litres The reason of excess consumption of fuel than the actual ceiling limit was asked through objection memo to clarified to audit.
In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violating the rule 14 and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule-1968. Hence the 624 litres of excess consumption of fuel than the actual limit is not admitted in audit and Rs.34320.00( 624x55) is suggested for recovery from Bimal Kumar Kamala, Dealing Assistant and Sri Saroj Kumar Ray ,Assistant Administrator who are equally responsible for such excess consumption.
14.34 -
This para was dropped from here and is dealt in 15.11 which was regarding non-production of case records
14.35 - Non refund of balance advance amount after adjustment:(OSP-140)
Ref- Vr. No.JV-348/18.1.14
While checking the above Journal voucher with reference to the cash book for the year 2013-14 it is found that Rs.4830/- has been adjusted against advance paid vide Vr.No.36/ 8.4.11 and 3691/ 25.3.11 of Rs10000.00. and Rs7000/- respctively paid to Sri. Narasingha Mohapatra, Marketing Executive towards T.A expenses from 27.3.11 to 1.4.11 proceeded to New Delhi for Renewal of VAF Licence. Balance amount of Rs. 12170/- was not refunded till to day as seen from the advance register.
As per Memo No. CS-II-9/2008 25485(255)/F Dated 17.05.2008 by the Finance Department , tour of a contractual employee should be approved by the competent authority.Since Sri Mohapatra is a contractual employee the approval order of the Competent Authority for performing tour is required but the same is not available in the voucher guard file. Again as against advance of Rs.17000/- only Rs4830/- has been adjusted vide-348/ 18.1.14.
In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violating the Rule 14 and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule-1968 and suggested for recovery from Sri Narasingha Mohapatra, Marketing Executive of Rs.12170.00 failing which Sri Tripati Nanda Dash Dy.Administrator (F) and Smt,Janaki Karuna Devi Accountant are held responsible for such non adjustment of Advance.
14.36 - Non production of Log BookOSP-98-103
While checking the fuel issue register wrt coupon guard file for the year 2012-13 and 13-14 it was found that fuel has been purchased through cash & credit bills and issued to concerned drivers of the following vehicle and also to .Sri Gopinath Das electrician –in charge of Disel Generator sets. But after several verbal request regarding production of the concerned logbook and D.G Set log book has not produced to audit for checking. The details of log books are given below. .
Sl. No. Vehicle No. Coupon No./Vr.No./Date Diesel/Petrol issued Amount 1. OD-02-4876 2310/29.9.12 25 ltr. 1248.50 2316/6.10.12 45 ltr 2247.30 2328/17.10.12 40 ltr. 1997.60 2333/28.10.12 20 ltr. 1002.4 2340/5.11.12 35 ltr. 1754.20
102 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
2350/12.11.12 30 ltr. 1503.60 2367/25.11.12 45ltr. 2255.40 2371/27.11.12 20 ltr. 1002.40 2378/6.12.12 40 ltr. 2004.80 2387/17.12.12 40 ltr. 2004.80 2391/22.12.12 30 ltr. 1503.60 2401/31.12.12 20 ltr. 1002.40 2409/9.1.13 35 ltr. 1754.20 2416/12.1.13 25 ltr. 1253.00 2430/24.1.13 30 ltr. 1519.80 2442/7.2.13 30 ltr. 1520.40 2451/16.2.13 35 ltr. 1793.05 2461/27.2.13 40 ltr. 2049.20 2468/6.3.13 20 ltr. 1024.60 2487/29.3.13 20 ltr. 1035.40 Vr.No.2671/1.1.13 15 ltr. 749 2500/14.4.13 30 ltr. 1551.60 2512/24.4.13 25ltr 1294.25 2525/4.5.13 30 ltr. 1553.10 2529/11.5.13 20ltr. 1057.40 2532/15.5.13 40ltr. 2114.80 2550/30.5.13 40ltr. 2114.80 2557/9.6.13 20ltr. 1069.60 2565/14.6.13 25ltr. 1337.00 2573/20.6.13 35ltr. 1871.80 2576/23.6.13 30ltr. 1604.40 2592/3.7.13 50ltr. 2706.00 2605/8.7.13 30ltr. 1623.60 2619/16.7.13 35ltr. 1894.20 2623/21.7.13 30ltr. 1623.60 2635/1.8.13 35ltr. 1914.85 2639/6.8.13 20ltr. 1094.20 2649/13.8.13 30ltr. 1641.30 2652/16.8.13 25ltr. 1367.75 2662/24.8.13 40ltr. 2188.40 2672/2.9.13 40ltr. 2212.40 2675/6.9.13 30ltr. 1659.30 2689/21.9.13 30ltr. 1659.30 2710/22.10.13 25ltr. 1397.75 2721/7.11.13 30ltr. 1695.30 2739/27.11.13 45ltr. 2542.95 2751/3.12.13 30ltr. 1713.30 2756/9.12.13 35ltr. 1998.85 2767/19.12.13 35ltr. 1998.85 2775/24.12.13 35ltr. 2002.35 2782/31.12.13 25ltr. 1430.25 2792/14.1.14 30ltr. 1734.60 2806/27.1.14 45ltr. 2601.90 2815/4.2.14 20ltr. 1168.40 2824/13.2.14 35ltr. 2044.70 2829/18.2.14 50ltr. 2921.00 2852/5.3.14 45ltr. 2655.45 2858/11.3.14 35ltr. 2065.35 2868/18.3.14 20ltr. 1180.20 2879/27.3.14 35ltr. 2065.35 Total: 1925 ltr 102595.85 2. OR-13D-0443-TVS Sport 2168/21.4.12 5ltr. (Petrol) 328 s 2203/9.6.12 5ltr 328 2269/31.7.12 5 ltr. 328 2287/29.8.12 5 ltr. 328 2315/3.10.12 5ltr 328 2346/9.11.12 5ltr. 528 2375/3.12.12 5ltr 328 2403/2.1.12 5ltr. 328
103 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
2443/8.2.13 5 ltr. 328 2474/15.3.13 5ltr 328 Total: 100 ltr petol 3280.00 3. OR-16A-9596 Vr.No. 136/20.4.12 88ltr 4024 302/4.5.12 156ltr. 7027 624/9.6.12 89ltr. 4006 1027/24.7.12 55ltr. 2515 1231/16.8.12 88ltr. 4000 1293/23.8.12 100ltr. 4505 1445/31.8.12 60 ltr. 2700 1554/6.9.12 48ltr. 2200 1868/3.10.12 113 ltr, 5100 1869/3.10.12 82ltr. 3700 2149/3.11.12 55 ltr. 2500 2150/3.11.12 77ltr. 3486 2356/26.11.12 124 ltr. 5584 2494/12.12.12 144 lts. 6500 2755/11.1.13 44 ltr. 2000 2756/11.1.13 55ltr. 2500 2757/11.1.13 44ltr. 2000 3134/28.2.13 55ltr. 2500 41/9.4.13 40 ltr 2044 164/22.4.13 110 ltr 5539 284/6.5.13 51 ltr. 2555 165/22.4.13 80 ltr. 4015 438/20.5.13 171 ltr. 8592 688/12.6.13 77 ltr. 3500 1110 /25.7.13 60 ltr. 3000 1111/25.7.13 60 ltr. 3000 1491/5.9.13 60 ltr. 3000 1492/5.9.13 74 ltr. 3700 1965/24.10.13 116 ltr. 5846 2294/19.11.13 152 ltr. 7600 2974/30.1.14 76 ltr. 3800 3086/14.2.14 46 ltr. 2300 3429/21.3.14 70 ltr. 3500 C.No.2231/24.6.12 20 ltr. 883.80 2241/1.7.12 10 ltr. 441.90 Total 2750 ltr 130163.70 4. OR-10A-7384(JCB) 2742/30.11.13 20ltr. 1142.20 OR-01N-3519 2743/30.11.13 20ltr. 1142.20 OR-10A-7384(JCB) 2747/2.12.13 20ltr. 1142.20 OR-01N-3519 2748/2.12.13 20ltr. 1142.20 OR-10A-7384(JCB) 2752/3.12.13 20ltr. 1142.20 Total: 100 ltr. 5711.00 5. All D.G. Set 2149/3.4.12(Temple Sadar) 200 ltr. 8838.00 2150/3.4.12 (Bhakta Niwas) 200 ltr. 8838.00 2160/18.4.12 (Paschimadwar) 200 ltr. 8838.00 2161/18.4.12(Paschimadwar) 200 ltr. 8838.00 2161/18.4.12 (Bhakta niwas) 200 ltr. 8838.00 2173/4.5.12 (Sadar office) 200 ltr. 8838.00 2174/4.5.12 ((Bhakta Niwas) 200 ltr. 8838.00 2196/30.5.12 (N.B.N) 200 ltr. 8838.00 2204/9.6.12 ((Paschimadwar) 50 ltr. 2209.50 2205/9.6.12(Paschimadwar) 50 ltr. 2209.50 2206/9.6.12 (N.B.N) 50 ltr. 2209.50 2207/9.6.12(Main office) 50 lt. 2209.50 2214/17.6.12(Paschimadwar) 200 ltr. 8838.00 2215/17.6.12(Paschimadwar) 200 ltr. 8838.00 2216/17.6.12(Bhakta Niwas) 200 ltr. 8838.00 2217/17.6.12(Sadar office) 150 ltr. 6628.50 2258/20.7.12(All generator) 1000 ltr. 44190.00 2266/27.7.12(All generator) 600 ltr. 26292.00 2276/8.8.12(All generator) 600 ltr. 26394.00 2306/25.9.12(All generator) 600 ltr. 29964.00
104 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
2319/9.10.12(All generator) 600 ltr. 29964.00 2332/20.10.12(All generator) 550 ltr. 27467.00 2342/5.11.12(All generator) 600 ltr. 30072.00 2411/10.1.13(All generator) 400 ltr. 20048.00 2507/18.4.13(All generator) 700 ltr. 36239.00 2552/1.6.13(All generator) 800 ltr. 42784.00 2588/30.6.13(All generator) 800 ltr. 42784.00 2608/9.7.13(All generator) 200 ltr. 10824.00 2613/14.7.13(Gundicha Bhakta Niw 300 ltr. 16236.00 as) 2648/13.8.13(All generator) 500 ltr. 27355.00 2701/5.10.13(All generator) 700 ltr. 39137.00 2706/9.10.13(All generator) 800 ltr. 44728.00 2708/14.10.13(All generator) 400 ltr. 22364.00 2728/13.11.13(All generator) 800 ltr. 45208.00 2803/24.1.13(All generator) 900 ltr. 52038.00 Total: 14400 726773.00 In response to audit objection memo no reply was furnished by the local authority which is highly irregular and violating the rule 14 and 15 of Shri Jagannath Temple Audit Rule-1968. Hence, the amount of Rs. 726773.00 is held under objection till production of vehicle log book and generator set log book.
At the time of exit conference,the Log Book of 3 nos of DG set produced to audit for verification ,the same was verified and found correct.Hence the Para is dropped.
14.37 - Utilisation of Electrical Stock wanting OSP 253-254
Utilisation of Electrical Stock wanting (OSP)
While checking the electrical stock register w.r.t purchase voucher no- 351/6.8.12, it is seen that electrical goods purchased against the bill no- 12136/18.6.12 from Orissa Electrical corporation as per order no- 9189/8.6.12 & 9983/16.6.12 for Rs 387431. But the utilisations of purchased electrical goods as given in the below table was not found from the stock register.The utilisation of the same has asked through objection memo but no reply has been furnished by the local authority till close of audit &.there is no physical verification certificate was also available in the stock register. Hence total amount of Rs 387431.00 was kept under objection. During Exit conference they produced the stock register and verified and is found that utilisation against purchase of Electrical goods of Rs. 74711.00 is not submitted. Hence purchase of Electrical goods of Rs. 74711.00 till utilisation of the same shown is held under objection.
NAME OF THE NO OF QUANTITY TOTAL VALUE STOCK ISSUED TO WHOM REMARKS ELECTRICAL GOODS PURCHASED @ ENTERED AT SHOWN IN THE PURCHASE VIDE VR NO PAGE NO- STOCK REGISTER 351/6.8.12
Ceiling Fan 22+8=30 @ 1550 46500 5 Bhaktanivas without The stock received by S.K.Maharana, JE electrical 48" Harvel make initial of the receiving officer
Exhaust Fan 2pcs@1050/ 2100 5 Not issued, but Detail utilisation is not available in the stock register balance shown as nil
105 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
MCB 63A TPN 4pcs @ 1998/ 7992 15Not issued to anybody The available stock are not utilised but new but balance stock purchase are made .Hence the reason of shown as 4 Nos non utilisation of 4 nos may be clarified to audit.
MCB 32ATPN 5pcs @1300 5200 151 no issued to Bhakata niwas but balance 14nos shown unutilize d
Tube light 40watt 50pcs@35/ 1750 19issued shown without Utilisation wanting initial of receiver
Tube light 36watt 50pcs@35/ 1700 19issued shown without Utilisation wanting initial of receiver
Step Type Fan regulator 60pcs@160/ 1225 31Not issued till close of Where 30 nos of Fan purchased, what is the audit necessity of 60pcs of regulator?
.P.L.Lamp-36 watt 30 pcs 39Not issued till close of The stock received by S.K.Maharana, JE electrical audit
Lamp 18 Watt CLF 30 pcs @140/ 4200 43Not issued till close of The stock received by S.K.Maharana, JE electrical audit
Lamp GLS100 w 50 pcs @ 9.00 450 47issued without initial of The stock received by S.K.Maharana, JE electrical receiving officer
Decoration lamp 100w 100 pcs @ 9/ 900 54Not issued till close of The stock received by S.K.Moharan, JE electrical audit
Piano type switch 6Amp 20 pcs @ 13/ 260 60Not issued till close of The stock received by S.K.Maharana, JE electrical audit
Tube light 20wt 12 pcs @ 34/ 408 63Not issued till close of The stock received by S.K.Maharana, JE electrical audit
106 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Pendent Holder 25 pcs @19/ 76 71Issued 21 pcs without The stock received by S.K.Maharana, JE electrical initial of the receiving cost of balance4no officer and balance shown as nil
PVC twin cone wire 2 coil @1200/ 2400 75Not issued till close of The stock received by S.K.Maharana, JE electrical audit
total 74711.00
14.38 -
14.39 -
14.40 -
.
14.41 -
107 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
14.42 -
14.43 -
14.44 -
PARA: 15 AUDIT ON WORKS
15.1 - Common comments on the work executed, respective tender formalities and estimation of work value etc. -
On verification of work case records some common irregularities came to notice which are discussed below.
1. No specific Register showing the details of work executed, deduction particulars is maintained in this office.
2. As per sub-para 3.4.2 of para 3.4 of the OPWD Code a schedule of rates of each kind of work commonly executed in the different areas of the state should be annually approved by the rate Board Committee or any other authority on the basis of prevailing rates of material labour etc., which is to agree with the rate analysed by the Work Deptt. A detailed statement in case of deviation of rate, must be given in the report showing the manner in which the rate used in the estimate are arrived at. But in most of the case records/files, no analysis of rate used in the estimate are given and without stating any reason the rate per items have been estimated much higher than the Analysis of rate prescribed by the Work Deptt.
3. As per para 3.4.10 on every estimates, whether submitted to Chief Engineer. or Superintendent Engineer or any other officer for sanction under the power delegated to him , a declaration certificate should be recorded by the Divisional Officer showing the detail of spot verification and preparation of estimate in most economical and safe way.No such certificate are there available in the case records. In most of the case records no sketch map of construction of work are found attached.
4 .Before payment of final bill, post measurement of work completed are not recorded in the case files.
5. In most of the work bills, amount towards royalty have been deducted less than the due.
6. Deviation of work are not approved by preparing deviation statement and obtaining their subsequent approval both technically and administratively in most of the cases. No revised estimate are also made and approved for enhanced/deletion of the work items.
7.No specific Register showing the case History of each construction and their repair work is not prepared in the temple office, so that respective durability of the construction and necessity of serial repair can be well judged. The Register should contain all the information regarding the files/part files dealing the construction and repair of the single item, page reference of the Work Register for reference of the observer.
8. During the years under audit, the royalty amount i.e. deducted from work bills are not deposited in Govt. treasury.
9. The contractors have not produced the bills in support of payment of royalty in any of the cases. Whether they are purchasing stone/stone products,sand etc. from the registered quarries/Farms or not, can not be ascertained. From the safety point of view and in order to curb the environmental pollution, the local authority should keep a keen watch on the procurement of royalty bills from the contractors.
108 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
15.2 - Loss of Govt. Revenue due to less deduction of royalty from the work bill,inadmissible refund of security deposit to the contractor and unauthorized deviation of work items.- OSP256 to 261
Name of the work Development work of Narendra Tank, Puri. Cost estimated Rs.46,94,000.00 Tender /negotiated amount Rs.46,67,385.00 Dt. Of commencement of the work 23.4.12 Dt. Of completion of the work 22.8.12 Total bill amount 4422374.00 Paid during the years under audit Voucher No Amount paid
819/12.12.12 828036.00 527/15.9.13 1543208.00
On verification of stated work bills as well as the total work projects, it was observed that the royalty from the work bills have been deducted less than the due. The details are discussed below.
A) Following table -1 shows the required/used materials in the item wise work as per analysis of rate prescribed by OPWD Code followed by the castings of calculation of royalty due for deduction and royalty deducted from the work bills v in table No.-2 and 3 respectively.
Table-1
Nature of work Quantity of Material required work done
Work item Stone product Laterite stone sand
Chips metal Filling F & P with sand 223.36 cum 223.36 cum
R.C.C.(1:4:8) 77.4 74.3 37.15 P.C.C.(1:1.5:3) 38.25 34.42 17.21 L.S.M.(1:6) 45.8 45.8 10.99 R.C.C (1:1.5:3) 56.55 50.89 25.44 Total 85.31 74.3 45.8 90.79 Table-2
Royalty due for deduction from the bills :-
Material used Quantity used Rate of royaltyAmount of royalty to be in Rs. deducted in Rs. chips 85.31 cum 70.56/cum 6019.47 Metals 74.3 cum 70.56/cum 5242.60 Stone product Laterite stone 45.8 cum 98.00/cum 4488.40 Sand 90.79 cum 19.60/cum 1779.48 Total 17529.95 or say Rs.17530.00 Table-3,Royalty deducted:-
Bill particulars Bill amount Amount deducted from the bill towards royalty 1st R bill 2051130.00 13226.00 2nd R bill 1543208.00 1786.00 3rd/final bill 828036.00 150.00 4422374.00 15162.00 Due to less deduction of royalty from the work bill as detailed above Govt. revenue to the extent of Rs. 2368.00 (Rs.17530.00-Rs.15162.00) has
109 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
been lost and the financial benefit went to the contractor. The local authority was provided with this single example and advised to be vigilant to check the due deduction of Govt revenue before final payment of work bills in future. The provision of financial benefit to the contractor backed by the less deduction of royalty is subject to recovery from the contractor, failing which recovery of the lost amount is suggested from the dealing Asst, S.O. of the works section, who did not verified the deduction from the bills and the J.E., who prepared the bills.
(B) Inadmissible refund of security deposit to the contractor:-
The table below shows the details of amount received from Tourism & Culture Deptt. following the work schedules to be done.
Particulars of receipt of Govt. Grant Particulars of expenditure of Govt. Grant M.R.No. Dt. Of receipt Amount Voucher no. Dt. Amount spent received 5919 28.3.2007 3755000.00 254 5.7.12 2051130.00 310 23.4.2007 291000.00 527 15.9.12 1546208.00 471 29.4.2008 73000.00 819 12.12.12 828036.00 Total 4119000.00 4422374.00 It revealed that the balance expenditure amounting to Rs.303374.00 (Rs.4422374.00-Rs.4119000.00) has been met from the temple fund.
As attached in page no 78/c of the file No.LV 13/13, the scope of work to be done against the Govt. sanction of Rs.41.19 lakh is as follows.
Scope of work:-
1 . Raising of the existing retaining walls.
2 . Development of bathing ghats using khandolite stone for steps and walls
3 . Provision of water supply to the garden on the bank of Narendra Tank,
4 . Provision of concrete foot path with chequored tiles,
5 . Provision of G.I.pipe railing around foot path(inside),
6 . Provision of M.S. grills around foot path(Out side),
7 . Provision of additional illumination with light posts.
The original estimate made amounting to Rs.4694000.00 against said Govt. grant has been approved on 12.12.11 comprising all the above 7 no.s of work items. It is revealed from the 3rd and final bill that the work has been commenced on 23.4.12 and completed on 24.8.12. A public agitation in the concern of Narendra Pokhari was published in daily “Samaj” on 24.9.2012 just after one month of completion of work, a paper clip of which is attached in the file at p135/c. Some statement in the said publication reveal that the broken steps of the tank were not repaired till date and public were suffering from accident by using the steps which were full of fungus. It is further noticed in the publication that the electric poles surrounded the tank were out of order and the miscreants were active as the surrounding area of the holy tank was in dark. Under such circumstances,the Administrator certified that the the work was completed and satisfactory in every sphere.The intention of payment to the contractor for development of bathing ghats using khandolite stone for steps and walls and also for provision of additional illumination with light posts with a certificate that the work done by the contractor is satisfactory, is not crystal clear.The local authority was requested to supply the case history of repair and renovation work in Narendra tank for verification, so that the genuineness of construction work and subsequent repair would be well judged. But unfortunately,the Objection Memo fetched no response.
Further in spite of public agitation regarding substandard work in Narendra Tank, the local authority without any assessment has sanctioned the amount of Rs.93350.00 (Rs.47000.00, EMD + Rs.46350.00,ISD) and Rs.221119.00 as security deposit vide sanction order No.10444/dt.12.9.13 and 10442 dt.12.9.13 respectively for refund and the said amount was refunded to the contractor by issuing cheque no755706/12.9.13 vide expr. voucher No.647 & 648/ dt.12.9.13. As the same refund is not admissible, the local authority was requested to explain why the refunded amount of Rs.314469.00 (Rs.93350.00+ Rs.221119.00) would not be treated as undue financial benefit to the contractor and to recoup the loss to the temple fund , the same amount would not be suggested recovery from involved J.E.,A.E, who measured and check measured the work and the Administrator, who certified the work.The local authority thought it better not to respond the objection memo.
( C ) The note of the Administrator at p 39/c of the work case record was referred. In which he reported, “I have visited the work on 1.7.12 along with A.E. & J.E.(Civil). It is found that measurement have been taken and present running bill has been done as per the quantity of work done in the site and not in conformity with the quantities in the estimate in respect of each item of work. While in some of the items,the work done is more than the quantity, in other cases it is less than the provisions made in the estimate. The J.E. and A.E. told me that after completion of the work while final bill will be presented the revised work done estimate and deviation statements will be submitted to regularize the present deviations.” Though it was assured by the A.E. & J.E. to produce the revised work done estimate and deviation statements before payment of final bill, the same was not produced at all. As per para3.11.2 of OPWD Code, a revised estimate must be submitted when the sanctioned estimate is likely to be exceeded by more than 10 percent .Further as per para 3.11.1, any development of the project while the work is in progress,which is not fairy contingent on the proper execution of the work as first sanction,must be recovered by a supplementary estimate,accompanied by a full report or the circumstances which render it necessary. Para 3.12.1 of the OPWD Code also reflects that the work completion report should give a comparison and an explanation of difference between the quantity, rate and cost of the work executed and those entered in the estimate. In this case, though the quantum of work in following cases are crossed the limit , without any presentation of revised estimate or deviation statement ,
110 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
the deviated work items are forcefully regularized in spite of objection of the Administrator and the contractor has been paid for Rs.511291.50 or say Rs.511292.00 extra for enhanced items. The local authority was requested to explain why not the objected amount would be recovered from the J.E. & A.E., who measured and check measured the work before final payment of the bill. Till to the end of audit, no response was received in compliance.
Work item/unit Quantity of work Quantity of Excess Bid Rate per Excess scheduled to be work done in quantity done unit payment is done in cum cum made in Rs.
Filling F & P with sand well watered, compacted including cost,94 223.36 129.36 615 79556.4 conveyance, taxes, royality with labour and T& P.
Providing and laying plain cement concrete(1:4:8) using 40mm black62 77 15 3385 50775 hard granite crusher broken metal with all cost of material,taxes etc.
Providing and laying plain cement concrete(1:1:5:3) using 12mm black30 39 9 5810 52290 hard granite crusher broken metal with all cost of material,taxes etc.
Providing and laying reinforcement cement concrete(1:1:5:3) using41 56.55 15.55 6850 106517.5 12mm black hard granite crusher broken metal with all cost of material,taxes etc.
Providing anti-corrosive tor steel reinforcement bars including cutting,20.5 46.05 25.55 5550 141802.5 bending and binding the grill etc.
Supplying ,fitting & fixing reinforced cement concrete battlement of1445 1693 248 300 74400 design and size approved made out of cement concrete (1:1.5:3) with all cost and taxes.
Painting 2 coats with water proofing cement paint including all cost.in1246 1545 299 19.9 5950.1 sqm.
Total 511291.5 As the local authority did not respond the Objection Memo, the objection made by Audit stands on it's own merit and thus the total alleged amount as discussed in sub heads of (A),(B) & (C) of Rs.828129.00 (Rs.2368.00+Rs.314469.00+Rs.511292.00) is suggested for recovery from the contractor, failing which the amount is recoverable from the J.E. and A.E.concern.
15.3 - Inadmissible construction of RCC roof slab on the Narendra Chakada- OSP283-284
Name of the work Providing RCC roof slab over Narendra chakada Mandap, Puri. Cost estimated 340000.00 Tender /negotiated amount 330550.00 (The amount is obtained from the tender paper as no comparative statement is made.) Dt. Of commencement of the work 5.4.13 Name of the Contractor Sri Bichitrananda Nayak. Dt. Of completion of the work 4.5.13 Total bill amount 272543.00 Paid during the years under audit Voucher No Amount paid
82/27.4.13 15500.00
111 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
On verification of the stated case records,the irregularities ,noticed are discussed below.-
A) Regarding payment for provision of RCC roof slab over Narendra chakada Mandap, Puri:-
Studied the work case record No.LV -92/14 in connection with the construction of Mandap over Narendra Tank Chakada and found that the work of construction of single storied RCC core structures(Civil work only) has already been completed by M/s Pyramid Engineerings consisting the work item of Providing,litting,hoisting and laying reinforced cement concrete with M:30 to base of columns and footing,coumns,beams, plinth band , lintels,cantilvers, slabs, balconies, staircases, parapets etc.and finishing the exposed surfaces smooth by plaster with cement mortar (1:4)”, in which construction provision of roof slab for 25.30 cum of cost amount of Rs.161862.00 is there. It is revealed from the final bill submitted by the agency that payment is made for Rs.238525.00 for construction of 39.20 cum of roof slab. It is to inform that no analysis of rate and no sketch map in support of such work is found attached to the file. The Chief Administrator has approved the proposal of refund of S.D. on the recommendation that the work has already been completed( P25 to 26/N of the file.) in 2008.
Further, from the comments at p29/c of the file, it was learnt that as there was water accumulation over the slab over RCC beams constructed by M/S Pyramid Engineering, it was harmful for the slab.Hence, it was proposed again to provide a RCC slab over the beams , for prevention of water accumulation and preparation of the platform for construction of temple like structure . Only for a RCC slab, an estimate of Rs.3.40 lakh has been made.
1) In the estimate of Rs.3.40 lakh there are the provision of beams and as per measurement book the construction of beams are made as per the details in following table.
M.B. No.01/13, Pg. No. Work of construction of beam i.e.completed. 1x60’.5”x0’.10”x0’.3”=12.53 cft 2x60’.5”x0’.10”x0’.1”=8.32 cft. 76-83 6x22’.0”x0’.10”x0’.1 ½”=13.69 cft. For Hatisala compound wall top beam 1x116’.0”x41”x0’.2 ½”=22.19 cft. 1x65’6”x0’.11”x0’.2 ½”=12.53 cft Pg. No.139-143 Work of construction of beam i.e.completed 1x22’.8”x0’8”x0’4”=5.01 cft 1x22’.4”x0’.8”x0’.4”=4.93 cft. As the beams already are there on the roof slab, the necessity of construction of so many beams seems not to be justified.Audit needed clarification in this respect from the local authority on the following points.:-
2 ) As there is no provision in original estimate for Hatisala compound wall top beam and the beams as shown constructed in pg no139-143 of MB Book , the local authority was requested to justify the same that how without obtaining the administrative approval, payment made to the work unauthorisingly done.
3) Where there was the necessity of temple like structures on the mandap, the local authority, has allowed to construct another plain roof slab over the existed one. Having a good deal of technical personnel in possession, the authority did not think it better to construct the temple like structure initially. It was also requested to explain, whether the expenditure of Rs.272543.00, the bill amount made for the new platform of temple like structure is not a wasteful expenditure, where a constructed platform is already there .
4) Practically it was viewed that there are no plain roof slabs beneath the temple like domes at Narendra Chakada. It may be construed that M/s Pyramid Engineerings have already constructed temple like domes. The construction of 2nd roof slabs and payment there of is base less. Proper investigation in higher level can unfold the fact.
Objection memo was issued to the temple authority to draw his attention to the irregularity, but the authority felt it better to keep mum on the raised objection. How ever, as the wasteful expenditure is a loss to the temple fund, it should be recouped after recovery from the J.E.,A.E.,concerned.
During Exit conference the Authority produced a compliance regarding
1. No construction of new beam rather modified the existing beam to get a sloped surface for proper drainage of rain water.
2. Since a RCC beam was provided for which the negligible amount Rs. 10004.00 is provided to the same agency hence no separate approval was needful
3. As the proposed temple like structure needs a plain strong base as slab provided will serve as the sub-structure; hence is not a wasteful expenditure
4. As the temple like structures are not yet constructed hence Audit observation is incorrect
Keeping in view the above compliances the objections are dropped.
15.4 - Excess payment due to overestimation and fixation of rate than the analysis of rate-OSP276 to 277
112 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Name of the work:- S/R to pathway to Narendra chakada,Puri Estimated cost Rs.130000.00 including charges of Rs.4736.00 towards unforeseen items. Tender cost of work Rs.124767.00 Sri Bichitra Nanda Nayak, Puri
Name of the contractor Dt. Of commencement 4.5.13 Dt. Of completion 11.5.13 Bill amount 124225.00 Vr. No.277 Dt.11.6.13
(A) The analysis of rate prescribed by the Works Deptt. shows the cost of the item of the work”Dismatling and removing R.C.C. columns, beams, slab, Staircase landing lintels including stacking the useful materials for reuse and removing the debris within 50m. lead per 1 cum” is as following :-
Particulars of manpower Manpower necessitated Prevailing Rate/head Total cost amount
Semiskilled mulia 1.50 No. 170.00 255.00 Man mulia 1.50 No. 150.00 225.00 Total 480.00 10% over head charge 48.00 Total 528.00 But in the cost the aforesaid item has been estimated as Rs.571.20/cum.How the said rate was arrived was not apprised to Audit. It may be stated that the contractor has offered his cost for the item for Rs.550.00/cum, which is already more than the admissible rate by Rs.22.00 (Rs.550.00-Rs.528.00) .
Like wise , as per analysis of rate the cost of item “Providing,laying,lifting R.C.C.(1:1.5:3) using 12 mm size BHGCB chips with cost, conveyance, taxes, royality of all materials with all labour and T& P.” comes to Rs.6161.29/ cum as stated following.
Admissible unit cost of CC(1:1.5:3) using 12 mm chips Particulars Quantum Prevailing T.C. per unit Basic Total cost Royalty necessitated cost per unit cost+T.C excluiding Royalty
Chips in cum 0.9 920 582.5 1502.5 1352.25 63.486 Sand in cum 0.45 42 343 385 173.25 8.82 Cement in qtl 4.29 740 13.4 753.4 3232.09 2nd class mason in no 0.68 129.2 0129.2 87.86
Man mulia in no. 4.6 150 0150 690.00 Total 5535.44 Add 10% OHC 553.54 6088.98 72.306 Total admissible unit cost 6161.29 But, the rate for the item is estimated is Rs.9090.34/cum, which is more than the admissible rate of Rs.3029.05 (Rs.9090.34-Rs.6061.29). It may be stated that the T.C. have been provided 75 k.m. for chips and 35 k.m. for screen sand. In this single item the contractor has been provided with a total financial benefit of Rs.4755.60 or say Rs.4756.00 @ 3029.05 for 1.57 cum of work done. The local authority was requested to clarify, whether the objected amount of Rs.4756.00 ,the loss to the temple fund is subject to be recovered from the person concerned or not.But no response from their side was received by Audit till to the departure from the camp.
Further, in voucher no.819/12.12.12 vide C/R No.IV 13/13 on the subject “Renovation of Narendra Tank” the rate for the same item of work i.e. R.C.C.(1:1.5:3) has been provided @ 6850.00/cum. But in this case, rate is provided for the same item of work is Rs.9090.34. How the rate arrived in both of the cases was not reported to Audit
(B) It may be stated that the Provision of concrete foot path with chequored tiles was made in the work item of “Development work of Narendra Tank, Puri”. The work was completed on 22.8.12. As the case record does not bear any survey report on the pathway of tank, the local authority was requested to explain what short of necessity compelled to do the special repair work to the pathway by an expenditure of Rs.124225.00 from the temple fund. Here also Audit failed to fetch any response to the Objection memo. The silence of the authority in this sphere proves that, the total expenditure is fake. Till production of compliance the amount is held under objection.
113 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
15.5 - Excess payment due to overestimation and deviation of works over and above the estimation:-228-233
Name of the work:- Construction of Pump House/store room at Koilibaikuntha. Estimated cost Rs.177001.63 Negotiated cost of work Rs.175886.60 Name of the contractor Sri Bichitra Nanda Nayak, Puri Dt. Of commencement 2.9.13 Dt. Of completion 28.10.13 Whether time extension is approved No. Bill amount 155975.00
1) On verification of analysis of rate prescribed by the Works Deptt.Govt. of Odisha and the estimate of the work it came to notice that the cost of item wise works have been enhanced arbitrarily without any mention of the cause there of in the case record .No analysis of estimated rate is attached in the file to justify the enhanced rate. A comparative statement between analysis of rate prescribed by the Works Deptt., Govt. of Odisha and estimate made by the temple authority is given in following table, which shows that some extra financial benefits are provided to the contractor by enhanced estimate leading loss to the temple fund.
(A)
Work item/unit Rate negotiatedRate as perThe unauthorisedQuantity done Financial benefit per unit Works Deptt enhanced cost of the allowed to the work item contractor
Earth work in excavation in all kinds of90 52.80 37.20 12.14 452 soil within initial lead and liftincluding leveling the bed with all labour with T& P/cum
(B) Referred other work items in connection to the aforesaid item,where there is no provision for staking or throwing the excavated earth outside the site found any where.It means that the excavated materials are reused in filling the foundation and plinth .As the excavated materials are reused,no purchase of materials for the purpose is made and subsequently no question of payment for royalty, conveyance ,loading and unloading charge is arisen. As per analysis of rate for filling in foundation and plinth with excavated materials sand including watering and ramming =Rs.20.38/cum as mentioned bellow.
Female mulia 12.36 [email protected]/head= Rs.1850.00
10 % overhead charges + Rs.185.00
Total Rs.2038.00/100cum say 20.38/cum
It may be stated that the rate per the item was estimated as Rs.903.33/cum.How the rate of Rs.903.33/cum is arrived by the J.E. was not explained to Audit. Audit requested to comply why the excess payment to the tune of Rs.4600.00 made to the contractor as detailed bellow would not be treated as loss to the institution, which was not complied with.
Quantity of WorkRate admissible Amount Rate negotiated as onAmount paid against the work Excess payment done admissible estimated rate made to the contractor 5.23cum 20.38 106.58 900.00 4707.00 Rs.4600.42 or say Rs.4600.00 ( C) Referred the estimate for the work item as mentioned against sl.3 i.e.”Providing and laying plain cement concrete(1:4:8) using 40 mm black hard granite crusher broken metal with all cost of material,taxes,royalty,conveyance etc..The rate for the item has been fixed by the J.E. is Rs.4639.15/cum. But as per analysis of rate as prescribed by the Work Deptt.,Odisha the is arrived as following:-
Admissible unit cost of CC(1:4.8) using 40mm metals Particulars Quantum Prevailing T.C. per unit Basic cost+T.C Total cost Royalty necessitated cost per unit excluiding Royalty
114 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Metals in cum 0.96 620 582.5 1202.5 1154.40 67.7184 Sand in cum 0.48 42 343 385 184.80 9.408 Cement in qtl 1.72 740 13.4 753.4 1295.85 2nd class mason in no 0.18 129.2 0129.2 23.26
Man mulia in no. 3.9 150 0150 585.00 Total 3243.30 Add 10% OHC 324.33 3567.63 77.1264 Total admissible unit cost 3644.76 As the admissible cost arrived as Rs.3644.76.
The differential cost of the estimate of Rs.994.39(Rs.4639.15-Rs.3644.76) was not complied .The authority was requested to state why the amount of Rs.2627.00.00.00 as detailed bellow , paid to the contractor by providing excess rate would not be treated as loss to the temple fund.The local authority stated nothing in response.
Quantity of WorkRate admissible Amount Rate negotiated as onAmount paid against the work Excess payment done admissible estimated rate made to the contractor 2.75 3644.76 10023.00 4600.00 12650.00 2627.00 (D) Description of the work item is “First class K.B.brick masonary work using 25cmx12cmx8cm size K.B.brick having crushing strength not less than75kg./cm2 in cement mortar(1:6) etc. for plinth and foundation work, for which the estimate is made for Rs.4178.72/cum. But as per analysis of rate provided by the Works Deptt.,Odisha, the rate is arrived as Rs.3404.52/cum. The differential cost of Rs.774.20 (Rs.4178.72-Rs.3404.52) was not complied .The authority did not state anything against the question why the amount of Rs.5270.55 paid to the contractor by providing excess rate would not be treated as loss to the institution.
Admissible unit cost of KB brick work in cement mortar for f & p(1:6) Particulars Quantum Prevailing T.C. per unit Basic cost+T.C Total cost Royalty necessitated cost per unit excluiding Royalty
Bricks in no.s(350) per I 1 1575 168.7 1743.7 1743.70 cum
Sand in cum 0.28 42 343 385 107.80 5.488 Cement in qtl 0.672 740 13.4 753.4 506.28 Mason spl. 0.35 205 71.75 2nd class mason in no 1.05 129.2 0129.2 135.66
Man mulia in no. 2.96 150 0150 444.00 Total 3009.19 Add 10% OHC 300.92 3310.11 5.488 Total admissible unit cost 3315.60 The admissible rate for the item comes to Rs.3315.60
Quantity of WorkRate admissible Amount Rate negotiated as onAmount paid against the work Excess payment done admissible estimated rate made to the contractor 7.07cum 3315.60 23441.29 4150.00 29340.50 5899.21 (E) Further, in respect of the same item as stated in category (C), the rate for superstructure comes to Rs.3413.31/cum. with an addition of 15% of labour charge in extra in the rate of plinth and foundation work. But as per the estimate made by the temple administration, the rate is fixed Rs.4215.02., where the differential cost comes to Rs.660.50./cum. As the work done for the quantity 9.07 cum at the tender rate , the contractor has been provided a financial benefit of Rs.5854.50
115 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Quantity of WorkRate admissible Amount Rate negotiated as onAmount paid against the work Excess payment done admissible estimated rate made to the contractor 9.07cum 3413.31 30958.72 4200.00 38094.00 7135.28 Out of 17 items of work ,as some tokens of example, the instant cases are given. The evidence shows that the rate of each item has been enhanced than the rates prescribed by the works Deptt. without stating the reason there of.How ever, the excess payment due to unauthorised enhancement of indicated items of work is not admitted by Audit and thus suggested recovery from the J.E.& A.E.concern for the total amount of Rs.20812.00 ( Rs.452.00+ Rs.4600.00+ Rs.2726.00+ Rs.5899.00+Rs.7135.00)
2) The following table shows that some quantity of the items of work have been enhanced without obtaining administrative approval in deviation statement. The inadmissible payment of Rs.17620.00 as detailed bellow caused due to unauthorized increase in quantity is recoverable.Audit raised question on these arbitrary action of the Engineering section . But Audit objection memo fetched no answer till to the end of audit.The local authority is requested to check the irregularities hence forth.
Work item/unit Quantity of workQuantity of workExcess quantityBid Rate perExcess payment scheduled to bedone in cum done unit is made in Rs. done in cum
Earth work in excavation in all kinds of soil within6.2 12.14 5.94 90 534.6 initial lead and liftincluding leveling the bed with all labour with T& P/cum
Providing and laying plain cement concrete(1:4:8)2.3 2.75 0.45 4600 2070 using 40mm black hard granite crusher broken metal with all cost of material,taxes etc.
First class K.B.brick masonary work using4 7.07 3.07 4150 12740.5 25cmx12cmx8cm size K.B.brick having crushing strength not less than75kg./cm2 in cement mortar(1:6) etc. for plinth and foundation work
Providing and laying reinforcement cement0.5 0.54 0.04 10350 414 concrete(1:1:5:3) using 12mm black hard granite crusher broken metal with all cost of material,taxes etc.
Providing 2.5 cm thick grading concrete in C.C15.70sqmt. 19.04sqmt. 3.34sqmt. 250 835 (1:2:2) using 6mm black hard granite crusher broken metal with all cost of material,taxes etc.
Providing 12mm thick cement plaster in (1:6) cement78.50sqm. 85.17 6.67 105 700.35 mortar after racking out joints12 mmdeep etc.
Providing 6 mm thick ceiling plaster in (1:4) cement12.20 sqm. 13.1 0.9 120 108 mortar etc.
Providing 2.5cm thick A.S flooring in C.C.(1:2:4)12.90sqm 13.79sqm 0.89 245 218
116 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
using 12mm size black hard granite etc.
Total 17620 As the Audit Objection was not complied with, the objection stands on it's own merits.And the total amount covered in sub-para1 &2 amounting to Rs.38432.00(Rs.20812.00+ Rs.17620.00) is suggested for recovery.
15.6 - Inadmissible refund of security deposit- OSP216-218
Work item Name of the work:- Construction of dormitory in ground floor of Nilachal Complex at Grand Road, Puri. Estimated cost Rs.1546183.45 Negotiated cost of work Rs.1545916.00 Name of the contractor Sri Rashmi Ranjan Tripathy Work order issued Dt. Of commencement 14.12.2010 for Dt. Of completion 10.10.2011
Whether time extension is approved Yes Whether ISD is realised No money receipt is enclosed Bill particulars Bill No./Dt. Of Bill amount Deduction of Net payment approval for payment S.D.@5%,Vat@4%, I.T & Cess @ 1% each & royality 1st R.Bill/6.6.11 248513.00 27714.00 220799.00 2nd R.Bill/ 1006172.00 Bill is not produced before Audit for verification
Final R Bill/20.3.12 1174909.00 30481.00 138256.00
Referred the voucher No.7769/1.7.13 and voucher no.7771 dt.1.7.13, which shows that Sri Rashmi Ranjan Tripathy, Contractor has been refunded a total amount of Rs.89746.00 as detailed bellow.
Amount refunded Heads of refund Voucher No./Dt. 58746.00 Security deposit 7769/1.7.13 15500.00 E.M.D. 7771/1.7.13 15500.00 I.S.D. 7771/1.7.13 Total 89746.00 Verified the work proceedings in respect of execution of the work. Following irregularities came to notice in course of study of work case record.
1) Two no.s of bidder were participated in the tender process. No money receipts in support of realization of EMD of Rs.15500.00 from both the bidders are available in case record no.106/13. The Cashier received the amount of Rs.15500.00 from Sri Rashmi Ranjan Tripathy on 4.12.10 as seen atpage 55/c of the case record vide M.R.No.4621.Further, the money receipt against the amount of Rs.15500.00, received from Sri Bichitrananda Nayak, the unsuccessful bidder said to have been realized vide 2415/ dt.16.8.10 is also not available in the case record.It may be stated that Sri Bichitrananda Nayak has been refunded the said EMD vide o/o No.18328 dt.24.12.10. Sri Rashmi Ranjan Tripathy is also refunded the E.M.D. and I.S.D. amounting to Rs.15500.00 each i.e.Rs.31000.00 in total vide o/o No.7771(2) dt.1.7.13.As per OPWD code any bid not accompanied by an acceptable Bid Security shall be rejected as non-responsive. The local authority was failed to produce the valid documents as mentioned above and for this the refund of the EMD & S.D.amount can not be taken admissible..
2) 2nd R.Bill dtd.24.9.11 amounting to Rs1006172.00, which was not attached in the case record and also was not produced for assessment of final bill.
3) Chapter IX(iii) of the OPWD code vol.-1, para 3.5.31 & para 6.3.17 show that any deviation from the Agreement with regard to the nature, specification, quantity and rates of items, requires the approval of the competent authority prior to payment. In this case, no approved deviation statement is prepared and placed in the file for authentication of deviation of work. As per codal provision in OPWD Code Amendment of para 6.3.2 during 2006, technical sanction of Suptdt. Engr. Is required to accord administrative approval for an estimate of Rs.1546183.00 . But,in this case administrative approval has been accorded on the technical sanction of an Asst. Engineer .As no approval from the competent authority is obtained in support of enhanced item as detailed in following table, the cost of unauthorized enhanced work i.e.Rs.24190.00 is recoverable from the contractor,failing which the Officer/Official involved in the process of payment including the J.E. and A.E.are liable to recoup the loss. Further,
117 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
in most of the cases, the quantity of items are reduced or left without any approval of the competent authority. The local authority should have inquired the matter before release of security deposit,E.M.D. and I.S.D.amount to the contractor. No record in support of such deed of the local authority is available in the case record. Audit Objection Memo issued in this respect also fetched no response from the local authority.Non-co-operation of the local authority leads to think that the refunded amount of Rs.89746.00 (Rs.58746.00,the S.D.+ Rs.15500.00,the E.M.D.+ Rs.15500.00,the I.S.D.) is not free from ambiguity..
Work item/unit Negotiated Quantity Quantity done Quantity done Excess payment made for the rate per scheduled in excess work done in extra item
Providing,fixing glazed alluminium window 3000 28 28.71 0.71 2130
Providing,laying plain cement concrete(1:2:4) 4500 2 4.9 2.9 13050 using 12 mm size chips/cum
Supplying all material, labours, T & P, fixing of 245 80 106.98 26.98 6610 PVC soil with 110mmdia PVC pipe/mtr.
Wiring to light, exhaust fan etc.with fixation of 150 12 28 16 2400 5A plug on same board/ No
Total 24190 4) For the work item of dismantling and removing rolling shutters including removal of frames and stacking the same for reuse with all labour & T&P , 29 No.s of labours were necessitated as per specification in estimated work. The estimate was approved on 29.10.10.The work was completed on10.10.11. When the prevailing labour rate was maximum Rs. 92.50/head then and there, the estimate has been made by fixing labour rate of Rs.300.00/head and the contractor was allowed Rs.330.00/head. To estimate the cost of the item of work by arbitrary enhancement of labour rate oppose the interest of the temple. Suitable explanation was solicited to reach the Audit section for settlement of the objection.Here also no response from the local authority was received.Such type of passive temperament of the authority proves that originally the estimate was made to provide the contractor a financial benefit .
Rate allowed for 29 No.s of Mulia @300.00/per head Rs.8700.00 Rate prevailing during 2011 in maximum @ 92.50/per head for 29 No. Rs.2682.50 of mulia Difference Rs.6017.50 = Rs.6018.00 As the above discussed irregularities are not complied, the objection stands on it's own merit.Till complied the refund amount of Rs.89746.00,the payment of unauthorised deviation of work for Rs.24190.00 and inadmissible enhancement of rate per item amounting to Rs.6018.00 i.e.Rs.119954.00 in total is held under objection and out of which Rs.30208.00 is suggested for recovery.
15.7 - Inadmissible & excess payment due to the estimate in enhanced rate:-OSP219-221
Name of the work S/R to Harisankar Temple such as painting with weather coat at Hatisala, Puri. Name of the contractor Sri B.K.Satpathy Estimated cost 62403.33 Tender cost 61811.00 Dt. Of commencement 7.1.13 Dt. Of completion 2.2.13 Voucher No./Dt. 326/28.6.13 Bill amount 60379.00
(A) As per para 3.11.2(a) A revised estimate must be submitted and got approved when the sanctioned estimate is likely to be exceeded by more than 5 percent in respect of residential building either from the rate s being found insufficient or when material development or deviation have necessitated. But in the item of works stated in the following table , the deviation in quantity of work have crossed their limit more than
118 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
5%,against which no deviation statement is got approved from the competent authority. The local authority was requested to state why the cost of deviated quantity amounting to Rs.7959.60 or say Rs.7960.00 would not be treated as unauthorized payment to the contractor. The silence of the authority proved that he was admitting the irregularities.
Name of the work Work quantityQuantity done Excess quantityRate of payment Amount paid for scheduled to be done deviated work done
Washing and cleaning plastic paint/distemper paint424 sqm. 469.12 sqm 45.12sqm 60 2707.2 including cost of painting sponge with all labour ,T& P
Painting two coats with weather coat of approved450.5 sqm 493.56sqm 43.06 80 3444.8 quality and wall premier with all cost, labout, T&P.
Painting two coats with water bound distemper paint 231 sqm 276.19 45.19 40 1807.6 with all cost, labout, T&P.
Total 7959.6 (B)As per para 3.4.1 and 3.4.2. of O.P.W.D.code Vol-1 a schedule of rates of each kind of work commonly executed in the different area on the basis of prevailing rates of materials in different places like urban areas,mining and industrial areas, unhealthy and inaccessible pockets etc. as decided by Govt.should be kept in each Divn. And the rate entered in the estimate should generally agree with such schedule of rate.But where for any reason,these are not considered sufficient, a detailed statement must be given in the report showing the manner in which the rates used in the estimate are arrived at. In the work items as mentioned in following table ,the rate have been varied,for which the contractor has been paid Rs.1403.00( Rs.299.00+ Rs.1104.00) un authorisingly. In this case record, no such analysis of rate in support of excess payment was available. Following 2 no.s of work item were given as the token of example. Here also the local authority was requested to comply the objection stating that why the amount of Rs.1416.00(Rs.306.00+ Rs.1110.00) would not be treated loss to the temple.Unfortunately ,the objection statement fetched no answer.
(1) Work item:- Providing 2.5 cm thick grading concrete in C C (1:2:2) using 6mm size black hard granite crusher broken cheaps etc.
(a) Rate as prescribed by the Work Deptt./1 sqm.
Admissible unit cost of 2.5 cm feet grading concrete(1:2:2) on roof slab using 6 mm down graded chips
Particulars Quantum Prevailing T.C. per unit Basic cost+T.C Total cost Royalty necessitated cost per unit excluiding Royalty
Chips in cum 0.0169 560 582.5 1142.5 19.31 1.19 Sand in cum 0.0169 42 343 385 6.51 0.33 Cement in qtl 0.1208 740 13.4 753.4 91.01 Mason spl. 0.1 205 20.5 2.05 Man mulia in no. 0.36 150 054 19.44 Total 138.32 Add 10% OHC 13.83 152.15 1.52 Total admissible unit cost 153.67 Rate arrived= Rs.153.67/sqm
(b) Rate estimated = Rs.301.50
The differential rate= Rs.147.83(Rs.301.50- Rs.153.67) was not reconciled.
119 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
(c) The rate quoted for the item is Rs.300.00
Work done7.58 sqm
Excess payment made at the differential rate of Rs.146.33(300-153.67) =7.58x146.33=Rs.1103.64 or say Rs.1109.18=Rs.1109.00.
As the local authority did not respond the objection made by the Audit,the objection is taken as authentic. The objected amount of Rs,7960.00 for unauthorised deviation of work & Rs.1109.00 for inadmissible enhancement of rate per item of work i.e.Rs.9069.00 is suggested recovery from the contractor and failing which the concerned A.E.& J.E,,the technical persons would be held responsible for the loss..
15.8 - Excess payment OSP-
Name of the Project----Renovation of old Pucca building at Barabati jaga near Malatipattapur.
Name of the Agency—Sri Gourahari Ray,Revenue Superviser , Work order no-19254/14.12.12
File No-LV124/12&9/13-----E.Cost:205000.00, Revised E . Cost-Rs 2,63,180.00
Voucher No-629/6.6.13 --- Amount paid-Rs.1.67,638.00(including advanace of Rs 150000.00)
Voucher No-3179/22.1.14----Amount paid-Rs,20980.00 (including advanceof Rs 15000.00)
Voucher No- 3178/22.1.14-Amount paid Rs- Rs,53490.00 ( including advance Rs 50000 .00 ),
TOTAL-Rs-242108.00
On scrutiny of the above work case record w.r.t. paid voucher, it is seen that revised estimate for Rs 2,63,188.00 has been approved on dt 23.10.13 for repair and renovation of old building at barabati jaga at Malatipattapur after completion of the project.But the said project was estimated for Rs2,05,000.00 after site inspection on dt15.9.12 .The pre commencement report , sketch of new building was not available in theFile No L.V.-124/12 to ascertain actual repair required for the old building. Hence, audit issued
an objection memo regarding the premeasurement of the repair work But fetched no reply.
along with file no-xxxviii-14/13 linked to this case requisite for production before audit. But the local authority has not been produced the same.
Further, on verification of the M.B. with reference to connected record, it is seen from the MB No-1/13 page no-101 – item no-4 that there are 3nos of grill gate provided in the building in place of 2nos of gate opening shown in the MB at page no-99 which is not free from doubt. On issue of objection memo no- no reply was furnished by the local authority.
The detail calculation is as follows-.
213kg /74.75sft=2.85kg/per sft
36.25sft*2.85kg=103.29*@61.90=Rs6395.00
Hence,the cost of additional I no of grill gate amounting to Rs 6395.00 which is not admitted in audit and suggested for recovery from Sri Srikant Ku Dash ,JE , Sri K. Siba Sankar Senapati A.E. are responsible for such excess payment and compliance reported to audit.
15.9 -
Sub:Repair of the electrical control room at Western gate of the Shree Jagannath Temple, Puri
Audit Ref:File No. 108/12 & LV 08/13,
Vr. No. 758/ 24.11.12 Amount involved - Rs 51044.00
& 75/26.04.13 Rs 30162.00
MB No-3/11
120 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
On scrutiny of the vouchers w.r.t. connected files it is seen that the repair work electrical control room at the western side have been executed by Sri B. N. Nayak, Contractor. In both the works several repair items are found same as detailed below
Item of work Vr. No./ Dt. 758/ 24.11.12(Dt. Of commencement 075/ 26.04.13 (Dt. Of commencement –24.09.12 Dt. Of completion – –28.02.13Dt. Of completion - 20.03.13) 14.10.12) Item no. 4 –Providing, laying, fitting of PCC 0.08cum 0.021cum 1:2:4 using 12mm chips Providing 12 mm thick cement plaster 1: 4 8.05sqmt 7.76sqmt
Supply and fitting of G.C.I sheets in roof 35.78sqmt 13sqmt Painting of two coat of cement paint inside and 129.16sqmt 7.42sqmt outside It could not be understood how the same repair work was executed by the same contractor after a lapse of 4 months. If the first repair was damaged within 4 months, why the same work order was issued to the same contractor for the second time. Neither MB No -3/11 was produced for verification nor the reason of execution of same work twice has been clarified to audit after issue of the objection memo. Hence the total expenditure of Rs 81,206.00 is kept under objection.
Again, it may be noted here that Rs 35000.00 had been sanctioned vide office order no - 8411/2.6.2009 to Sri Srikanth Kumar Dash EX- JE for the repair of the electrical control room near western side. But no work done certificate is available in the connected file. On verification, it was also ascertained that there is no outstanding advance against him which can prove that the aforesaid work must have been executed.
15.10 - Excessm payment made due to revision of estmate over and above the tender cost OSP-
Sub-Renovation of Anada Bazar (Construction of Stall for sukhili mahaprasada) inside the Shree Jagganath Temple ,Puri
Estimated Cost-;Rs 49,28,186.00
Date of Commencement -14.10.10
Date of completion—13.6.11
E.O.T. sanctioned upto-28.2.12
Actual date of completion—25.2.12
Voucher No-486/5.9.12 amount involved- Rs 74,211.00 7th / Final Bill on 15.2.12
The negotiated offer of Sri Bichitra Nanda Nayak, contractor, who was the lowest bidder to execute the above said work at the cost of Rs 49, 28,186/- ,had been approved on page no-2/N of File No-L.V.-11/13 and the work had been awarded to him vide office order no-18332/18.12.10 page no-37 where he was instructed to complete the balance work of Block –C’ and eight (8) no of shops of Block –D before 30.12.10’ which had been received by Sri B.N.Nayak., contractor. Accordingly the work had been executed by Sri Nayak from date 14.12.10 as seen from this file office order no-18192/14.12.10.to complete by dated 13.6.11 .
It may be noted here that Sri Ashok Kumar Sahoo, another contractor had already executed the aforesaid renovation of Ananda Bazar work and also given the completion certificate of 8 nos of stall of Sukhill bhog at Anada Bazar. Even though he had left the tender work in an incomplete stage, the local authority had not collected any penalty which had been imposed on him by the Chief Administrator while approving the tender work order of Sri Bichitra Nanda Nayak, contractor.
On scrutiny of the 7th and final bill amounting to Rs 74,211.00, it was seen that the total cost of the renovation work of Ananda Bazar had been raised to Rs 82,73,870.00 against which the detailed work done by both executant and measurement book relating to the entire work done is not produced to audit in spite of repeated request and issue of objection memo. Hence the total amount of Rs 82,73,870.00 the cost of the work is kept under objection till production of the detail bill from 1st running bill to final payment along with MB.
Further it is also asked through objection memo to clarified the reason of revising the cost of the project more than 10% of the original tender cost But no reply has been furnished by the local authority which prove that the local authority had given much more benefit to the contractor by way of revising the estimated cost for several time.Hence the differential cost of the tender cost could not be admitted in audit and suggested for recovery of Rs 3345684.00 (8273870-4973870) from Sri K.S.S.Senapati A.E and Sri B.Patra S.E.and Sri P.K.Hota Administrator
121 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
15.11 - Non-Production of Works Case Records along with M.B.s & related files OSP292-294
While checking vouchers for the year 2013-14, it was noticed that the following payments were made towards the construction and maintenance of works accounts. The local authority is requested to produce the works case records along with the M.B.s and related files to audit for verification till close of audit..
Voucher No./Date Purpose Amount ( in Rs.) M.B. No. Name of the Contractor Remarks 76/26.04.13 Repair of garage of Hatisala 32530.00 3/11 B.N. Nayak 497/16.8.13 False ceiling and aluminium window 173675.00 4/13 B.N. Nayak 516/20.8.13 Supply and fitting oh high mast light 188637.00 Orissa Electricity Corporation 520/21.8.13 Supply of switch gears for high 480388.00 Jagannath Udyog, Cuttack mast light 740/9.10.13 S/R of Banaka Ghar of SJT, Puri 26423.00 1/13 B.N. Nayak 911/19.11.13 S/R bill 265256.00 3/13 B.N. Nayak of Phulaguntha ghara at Neelachal Upban 909/19.11.13 Const. Of toilet with sceptic tank 95629.00 2/12 Bidhun Chandra Padhi at Jatni office 908/19.11.13 Modification of old A.C. room to 25921.00 5/13 Bidhun Chandra Padhi barrack 906/19.11.13 Stainless steel gate at the entrance 43116.00 3/13 B.N. Nayak of Neelachal Upban 905/18.11.13 Compound wall at Hatisala 248100.00 2/13 B.N. Nayak 904/18.11.13 Supply of Stainless 141954.00 3/13 B.N. Nayak steel strotage rack for phulaguntha ghar 903/18.11.13 S/R to Nilachal Bhuakta Nivas 68266.00 4/13 B.N. Nayak 902/18.11.13 Fitting and fixing 284076.00 2/13 B.N. Nayak of aluminium jally in Gundicha Bhak ta Nivas (VIP Suite) 1352/27.03.14 Renovation of Prashikhyana Hall 183590.00 2/14 Bipin Ku. Satapathy 1302/21.03.14 Const. Of compound wall 200816.00 7/13 Bipin Ku. Satapathy around Maritota Garden 1255/15.03.14 Const. of A-type quarter 12 nos. & 2376763.00 1/13 & 8/13 M/s OCC Ltd. BBSR D-type qtr.4 nos. (5th running bill ) 1251/13.03.14 Const. of kitchen set for Gundicha 141097.00 1/14 B.N. Nayak Bhakta Nivas 1250/13.03.14 Supply of D.G. set 80331.00 B.N. Nayak for Gundicha Bhakta Nivas
1233/11.03.14 Providing stainless steel barricade 254760.00 B.N. Nayak for Parimanik darshan 1180/15.02.14 Modification of old A.C. sheet room 51259.00 5/13 Bidhun Chandra Padhi
1179/15.02.14 Const. of toilet for Jatni Office 120176.00 5/13 Bidhun Chandra Padhi barrack 142/20.4.13 Repair of temporary kitxhen floor of 13000.00 02/12 B.N. Nayak Cash Voucher Bimala and other local depressions in bhitarbedha of temple 147/20.4.13 Modification of OSD room at police 54466.00 02/11 Cash Voucher barrack at Hatisahi 148/20.4.13 Modification of police barrack at 141658.00 02/12 Cash Voucher Hatisahi JV-/20.4.13 Fixing of tiles and other repair at 101721.00 02/13 Cash Voucher sadar office JV-/8.5.13 Repair of Nilachal Bhakta Niwas 4509.00 01/13 Cash Voucher JV-48/20.5.13 Painting the floor at Bhitarbedha 39574.00 02/11 Cash Voucher and Baisi Pahacha JV-53/25.5.13 Repair of Durgamadhab Temple 9906.00 01/13 Cash Voucher JV-78/18.6.13 S/R to Nilachal Bhakta Niwas such 80341.00 23/11 Cash Voucher as repair and sewerage pipe
122 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
477/25.5.13 Annual repair and white washing of 65863.00 02/11 Cash Voucher Dolabedi for Dolajatra-2013 505/25.5.13 Repair of sadar office building 107897.00 02/13 Cash Voucher 506/25.5.13 Purchase and colouring of 52090.00 03/11 Cash Voucher roadmaker paint with labour charges of bhitarbedha floor of temple JV-129/17.8.13 Renovation of phulaguntha ghar at 40333.00 01/13 Cash Voucher Jayamohan of Sri Jagannath Temple, Puri 346/10.1.14 Providing pipeline for watering to 26931.00 05/13 Cash Voucher lawn at Shri Gundicha Bhakta Nivas JV-523/19.3.14 S/R to of Sri Jagannath Temple 107897.00 02/13 Cash Voucher Office building such as providing vitrified tiles on the first floor JV-522/19.3.14 Purchase and cleaning of 50426.00 03/11 Cash Voucher roadmaker paint with labour charges of bhitara bedha floor of temple 56/23.4.12 Interior painting of Nilachala Bhakta 130975.00 8/10 M/S City Infra Devloper pvt. bank voucher niwas 2nd &3rd fioor 682/3.11.12 Partition wall of old office building 10548.00 do do 712/8.11.12 Sebayat hospital inside Dolabedi 48962.00 9/10 Bipin Satapathy do premises puri 721/16.11.12 Maintenance of Nilachala Bhakta 52646.00 2/12 do do Niwas providing wall almirah 722/16.11.12 Interior painting of Nilachala 135682.00 2/12 do do Bhakta niwas 723/16.11.12 Interior painting of Nilachala Bhakta 90356.00 2/12 do do niwas 797/5.12.12 Drain inside the temple for disposal 37134.00 9/10 B.N.Nayak do of waste water 273/10.7.12 Improvment of the land near 47079.00 4/10 Intra Devloper Puri do Rosaghar at Gundichha temple TOTAL 6932757.00 In response to audit objection memo no reply has been furnished . Hence, the total expenditure of Rs 6932757.00 is kept under objection till production of the same.
PARA: 16 AUDIT ON UNITS / DEPARTMENT
PARA: 17 AUDIT ON SCHEMES / PROGRAMMES
PARA: 18 MISCELLANEOUS
18.1 - Irregular promotion violating Cadre Rule prescribed by Temple administration and OSC Rule 1993 OSP 225-227
On study of file no. IX- 22/13 IX 54/1Departmental Promotion committee files at page 138 to 143, it was noticed that the Departmental Promotion Committee meeting was held on 31.1.12 at 12.30 p.m. The following members were present in the meeting.
Administrator (Niti ) Chairman
Administrator (Dev) Member
Administrator (Security) Member
Administrator (Estt) Member,Convener
123 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Discussion on different subjects were made in the meeting including promotion of some employees of the temple office. On the conclusion of every item wise decision, an identifiable comment is given by saying “Chief Administrator may like to take a decision on the score .”and the final approval is left over the Chief Administrator. In support of validity of the promotion given to different employees, no office order issued by the Chief Administrator is available in the file. As per the codal provision laid in the temple manual,the minutes of the D.P.C will be prepared and signed by all the members and Chairman and the same will be placed before the Chief Administrator for approval .After the minutes are approved ,the promotion order can be issued. The local authority was requested to produce the required office order in support of the validity of respective promotion through Audit Objection memo, which he did not turn over till to the end of audit. Rather the authority has tried to mislead the audit by saying that all the required documents are produced.
(1) As per Cadre rule of Shree Jagannath Temple Office ,the post of Accountant is to be filled up by way of Promotion from among the U.D.Cs provided he/she must have completed three years of service in the post of U.D.Cs and also successfully completed Accounts training from a recognized institution . As recommended in the meeting ,Smt. Janaki karuna Devi would be promoted to the post of Accountant .On verification of service book of Smt. J.K.Devi, no report regarding her pass out the training of Accounts as per codal provision is found recorded there in. Further at the time of her promotion from the post of LDC to the post of UDC, it was not verified regarding her Accounting training. As such, the validity of her promotion is not supported by the codal provision. Final approval from the Chief Administrator is not obtained as per necessity.The local authority was requested to comply the objection and to state that why the differential salary paid Smt. Devi from the dt. of her joining as UDC would not be recovered as she is not demoted to her post of LDC till to date.In response to the Audit Objection Memo it was replied that due to shortage of expert hands in key posts, promotion have been given basing on the seniority,experience and efficiency of the staffs.
If such is the case,after promotion the promoted employee could have achieved the accounts training for their professional career. On verification of relative service books of the promoted employees, it was found that they have not passed the Accounts Training till to the end of audit. But the local authority has assured that provision will be made for necessary training. Till then the salary of the following employees drawn against their respective new posts amounting to Rs.12078302.00 is held under objection. Besides, each irregularity noticed in course of audit have been discussed in the following points serially.
Salary particulars of the promoted employees. Name of the employees Gross salary Total salary For the year 2012-13 For the year 2013-14
Hari Hara Das Mohapatra 354770 422678 14632577 Rabinarayan Pujapanda 336754 0 14277807 Janaki Karuna Devi 317117 353715 13941053 Radhanatha pratihari 247226 320913 13623936 Krushna ch Apata 251378 283713 13376710 Talachu Basudev Mohapatra 265378 298747 13125332 Saraswati suar 260559 293240 12859954 Bhaskar Mishra 253139 284116 12599395 Rama Narayan Mishra 267954 305288 12346256 Total 12078302 (2) At that time of DPC meeting,4 nos of U.D.Cs post s were lying vacant. As per Cadre rule the posts were to be filed up by way of promotion through D.P.C from among the L.D.C.s provided that he/she must have completed 3 years of services in the post of L.D.C.and successfully completed Accounts training from a recognized institution . If not he /She has to completed the same before confirmation otherwise he/she will be demoted. The D.P.C recommend the following L.D.Cs from sl.no 1 to 6 for promotion to the post of U.D.C ..On verification of Service books and personal files of the promoted employees, it was found that none of them have passed the Accounts Traing.As none of them have been demoted to their previous post, the differential salary paid to them is not admitted in audit. Till the employee get their Accounts training, their promotion and sustainability of their respective salary as UDC is not accepted by audit and as discussed above vide item no.1 of this para, the total salary of them is held under objection.
(3)The Committee recommended the name of Sri Harihar Das Mohapatra and Sri Rabinarayan Pujapanda for Promotion from their retaining post as UDC to the post of Head clerk . Here is also, at the time of their promotion from the post of LDC to the post of UDC, their passing the Accounting Training were not checked .Such irregularity have been discussed in item no. 1 of this para.
(4 ) Sri Radha Mohan Pratihari L.D.C on the date of retirement on 31.1.12 i.e.the day of DPC Meeting , has been promoted to the post of UDC. It may be stated that the DPC Meeting was held on that day at 12.30 P.M.. But , on verification of the personal file and service book of Sri Pratihari, it is noticed that the time of joining of Sri Pratihari is not mentioned.Without any Accounts Training, how Sri Pratihari was eligible for promotion to the post of LDC, could not be ascertained by Audit.After retirement,there is no chance on his part to achieve Accounts training. The local authority has stated that on the basis of efficiency ,the promotion has been awarded as there is shortage of employees in key posts.If such was the fact, what interest of the office was fulfilled by awarding promotion to an employee who was going to retire on the particular day of promotion In absence of suitable answer,it may be construed that in order to give Sri Pratihari the promotional benefit, hasty decision is taken for his promotion. As Sri Pratihari has not achieved any Accounts Training, his promotion to the post of UDC is also not to be considered as valid and he should be
124 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
barred from the promotional benefit. As such, the amount of Rs.223487.00 paid to Sri Pratihari towards his gratuity and pension is a matter of reconsideration and till then the said amount is held under objection.
(5) Referred the office order No.3943 dt.19.3.12 in respect of promotion of Sri Laxman Bisoi ,Asst. Charcha Amin to the post Charcha Amin and Sri Sambhu Pradhan, Charcha Barkandaz to the post of Asst. Charcha Amin. Here in the office order it is mentioned that recommendation for the promotion is made in DPC Meeting held on 24.2.12 and 29.2.12. On verification of DPC file ,no copies of proceedings of said DPC Meeting are found attached in the file. The said copies with all the critarias was not provided to the Audit for verification in spite of issue of objection memo. It may be stated that Sri Bisoi has retired from service on achievement of the date of superannuation on 31.3.12.Neither the copy of required proceedings produced before audit nor the objection memo was complied till to the end of audit.Till production of the same the promotional benefit awarded to Sri Bisoi with the gross salary for the period in new post amounting to Rs.406560.00 is held under objection.
18.2 - Compliance to previous Audit Report(OSP-246)
A copy of Audit Report No.15/2013-14 on the account of Shree Jagannath Temple for the year 2007 - 08 to 2010 - 11 has been sent to the Administrator, Sri Jagannath Temple Administration, Puri vide Letter No.-2931/LFA, BBSR, Dated- 17.07.2014. The list of important irregularities as mentioned in the above Audit Report has not been complied yet. The motto of Audit is to inform the Local Authority regarding the irregularities noticed in the financial transaction of the institution. If not complied or any action has not been taken to prevent the irregularities, the very purpose of Audit will be deferred. Necessary steps initiated by the Local Authority in this respect may be appraised to Audit.
In response the local authority has replied, "produced". But compliance of the local authority has neither been furnished to the present audit nor to the office. Hence the local authority is requested to furnish proper compliance.
18.3 - Production of books of accounts relating to the year2007-2010
A copy of Audit Report No.15/2013-14 of audit conducted for the period 2007 - 08 to 2010 - 11 was sent to the Administrator, Sri Jagannath Temple Administration, Puri vide Letter No.-2931/LFA, BBSR, Dated- 17.07.2014. The previous Audit had required some books of accounts relating to the year 2007-08 to 2010-11 in the course of Audit which were not produced to them then and there for which the involved amount has been kept under objection vide Paras in the Audit Report as enclosed herewith.
The ongoing Audit requires the said registers, records as stated above for verification and non-production of which would lead the Audit to suggest recovery of the amount from the officials responsible.
18.4 - Non production of records by Establishment section (OSP 222-226)
On scrutiny of the cash book it was found that payment towards pension, gratuity and unutilized leave amounting to Rs 9606959.00 were made during the financial year 2012 – 13 and 2013 -14 in support of which Acquittance roll, pension files and service books were not produced to audit in spite of personal request. Hence the local authority was requested to produce the same for audit verification vide audit objection memo no. 115 dtd 10.04.15.
In response the local authority has replied,"records produced to audit for verification". But actually no such records have been produced to audit. Hence Rs 9606959.00 is held under objection.
18.5 - Approved sanction strength of the employees of Shree Jagannath Temple Office (OSP - 44)
During the years under audit i.e., 2012 - 13 & 2013 - 14 the approved sanction s trength of the employees of Shree Jagannath Temple Office and present strength of employees of Regular, Temporary & Contractual was asked for vide objection memo no. 30 dtd 25.08.14 and in response totheobjectionmemolocalauthorityhasfurnishedsamewhichisattachedinthisreportAnnexure______.
125 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
18.6 - EXCESS PAYMENT OF LEAVE SALARY OSP 57
“As per Rule 7, 8, 9 of Appendix-10(Orissa Leave Rules, 1966) to O.S.C. read with F.D. O.M. No. 20180/F. Dtd 22.04.76 and No. 31633/ F dtd 14.08.89, F.D.O.M. no. 7351/F dtd 19.02.03 maximum earned leave at a particular period to be availed shall not exceed 150 days. Total duration of earned leave and commuted leave taken in conjunction shall not exceed 240 days at a time”.
On checking the pay acquittance roll and pay bill registers of sadar staffs and police staffs for the year 2012 – 13 & 2013 - 14, it is found that leave salary has been sanctioned to Sri Mathuri Mohan Das, Driver for 179 days i.e., from 03.09.12 to 28.02.13 as against maximum limit of 150 days as per the above quoted rule. Hence the reason for sanction of 29 days more E.L. was asked for through audit objection memo no. 35 dtd 18.09.14. In response to the memo the local authority stated that invoking discretionary power of exhibiting leave rules at par with Rule 65 of Central Civil Service Rule of Govt of India, the leave for 179 days has been sanctioned. But for Shree Jagannath Temple Administration Office, leave rules of Govt. of Odisha is applicable. Again it is also stated in the reply of the Local Authority that the incumbent was suffering from dreaded disease of Kidney failure/ Cancer. But in support of this reply no file has been produced before audit for verification.
Similarly in case of Maguni Behera, JTP leave salary was sanctioned for 240 days of commuted leave and 128 days of E.L. in conjunction from 29.07.12 to 31.07.13 as against the total limited duration of 240 days as per the above quoted rule. The reason for sanction of excess leave of 128 days was asked through the same audit objection memo against which no satisfactory reply or supporting document has been furnished by the local authority.
Hence the total amount of Rs 70,567.00 undue salary paid to the above mentioned employee by the local authority in lieu of the excess leave sanctioned (detailed below), is held under objection till the production of satisfactory supporting documents.
Name of the employee and Excess no. of days Excess salary paid Reference designation 1. Mathuri Mohan Das, Driver 29 Rs. 16,791 Pg no. 35 of Sadar pay bill register of 2013 – 14. 2. Maguni Behera, JTP 128 Rs. 53,776 Pg no. 27 & 28 of Police pay bill register of 2013 – 14. TOTAL Rs. 70567
18.7 - Excess payment in salary by allowing extra increment (OSP 61-63)
While verifying the service books and pay bill registers of the employees of Sri Jagannath Temple Office, Puri it was found that extra incremental benefit was granted to the below mentioned employees there by deviating Clause 9 & 13 of ORSP rules 2008 and clause 10 of RACP resolution of finance deptt. Communicated vide FDOM No. 3560/F dtd 06.02.13 resulting in excess payment of salary during the period Oct’12 to Feb’14.
1. Anadi Swain, Mali
Salary as on 01.10.11 – Rs. 7530.00, G.P. Rs. 1650.00
Salary fixed on 01.10.12 by allowing annual increment – Rs. 7810.00, G.P. Rs. 1650.00 on the old pay
Further, his Salary was revised as – Rs. 8400.00, G.P. Rs. 1900.00 vide O/o no. 10934 dtd 27.09.13 w.e.f. 01.10.12 by sanction of RACP (i.e. pay revised over and above the enhanced salary of Rs. 7810.00 and by allowing another increment)
But as per the above quoted rules the salary as on 01.10.12 should have been fixed to Rs. 8100.00, with G.P. Rs. 1900.00
Hence excess salary of Rs 9340.00 is paid to him during the above mentioned period.
2. Iswar Chandra Barik, Sweeper
Salary as on 01.10.11 – Rs. 7300.00, G.P. Rs. 1400.00
Salary fixed on 01.10.12 by allowing annual increment – Rs. 7570.00, G.P. Rs. 1400.00 on the old pay
126 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Further, salary was revised as – Rs. 8120.00, G.P. Rs. 1600.00 vide O/o no. 10934 dtd 27.09.13 w.e.f. 01.10.12 by sanction of RACP (Pay revised over & above enhanced salary of Rs. 7570.00 and by allowing another increment)
But as per the above quoted rules the salary as on 01.10.12 should have been fixed to Rs. 7840.00, with G.P. Rs. 1600.00
This resulted in an excess payment of salary amounting to Rs 9305.00 to Iswar Chandra Barik
3. Binod Chandra Das, Sweeper
Salary as on 01.10.11 – Rs. 7300.00, G.P. Rs. 1400.00
Salary fixed on 01.10.12 by allowing annual increment – Rs. 7570.00, G.P. Rs. 1400.00 on the old pay
Further, salary was revised as – Rs. 8120.00, G.P. Rs. 1600.00 vide O/o no. 10934 dtd 27.09.13 w.e.f. 01.10.12 by sanction of RACP (Pay revised over & above enhanced salary of Rs. 7570.00 and by allowing another increment)
But as per the above quoted rules the salary as on 01.10.12 should have been fixed to Rs. 7840.00, with G.P. Rs. 1600.00
Hence excess salary of Rs 9303.00 is paid to the person concerned during the above mentioned period.
Hence audit issued memo no. 38 dtd 27.09.14 asking the local authority to take effective steps towards recovery of such excess payment of salary from the persons concerned.
The Local Authority has admitted the above fact and has replied that action is being taken to recover the amounts in appropriate installments as instructed by Audit. So the total sum of Rs 27948.00 is suggested for recovery from the persons concerned and compliance reported to audit.
18.8 - Excess payment of salary due to wrong calculation OSP 66 - 67
While verifying the service books and pay acquittance of regular staffs it was found that during the period of audit i.e., 2012 – 13 & 2013 – 14, excess salary is paid to the following employees due to wrong calculation of increment thereby violating Clause 9 & 13 of ORSP Rules 2008 and clause 10 of RACP resolution of Finance deptt. communicated vide FDOM No. 3560/F dtd 06.02.13 as detailed below:
1. Prafulla Kumar Behera, Mali
Increment sanctioned to Sri Prafulla Kumar Behera, Mali vide O/o no. 14940 dtd 11.09.12 w.e.f. 01.09.12 is excess by Rs. 10/- which is described here under.
Salary as on Aug’12 – Rs.4620/- , G.P. – Rs.1400/-
Increment admissible = 3% of Rs. (4620/- + 1400/-) = Rs. 180.60 Rounded up to Rs. 180/-
Revised pay due as on Sept’12 should be Rs. Rs. 4620 + Rs. 180= Rs. 4800
But revised salary paid to him in Sept’12 = Rs. 4810/-, G.P. – Rs.1400/- which is excess by Rs. 10/-
Similarly on further verification it was found that the increment sanctioned vide O/o no. 10934 dtd 27.09.13 is also paid excess by Rs.10/-
The details calculation of such excess payment in favour of Sri Prafulla Kumar Behera, Mali since Sept’12 is given below.
Month/Year Net amount paid (in Rs.) Net amount should have been paid Excess payment (in Rs.) (in Rs.) Sept’12 5898 5880 18 Oct’12 6332 6314 18 Nov’12 6332 6314 18 Dec’12 6332 6314 18 Jan’13 6332 6314 18 Feb’13 6332 6314 18 March’13 6207 6189 18 April’13 6207 6189 18 May’13 6704 6685 19 June’13 6704 6685 19 July’13 6704 6685 19 Aug’ 13 8108 8088 20
127 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Sept’ 13 6608 6588 20 Oct’13 6608 6588 20 Nov’13 6608 6588 20 Dec’13 6608 6588 20 Jan’14 6608 6588 20 Feb’14 6608 6588 20 TOTAL 341 2. Nabakishore Mohanty, Bkdz
Salary fixed by sanction of RACP vide O/o no. 2133 dtd 26.02.14 w.e.f., 01.10.13 in his favour is excess by Rs. 20 due to wrong calculation as drawn in the salary of Feb-14 which resulted in excess payment of Rs. 40.00. The detail of such excess payment is given below:
Date/Month/Year Salary Due Salary Fixed Excess Payment 01.10.12 Rs. 8660.00, G.P. – Rs. 2000.00 Rs. 8660.00, G.P.- Rs. 2000.00 Nil 01.10.13 (After increment) Rs. 8980.00, G.P. – Rs. 2000.00 Rs. 8980.00, G.P. – Rs. 2000.00 Nil 01.02.14 (After sanction of RACP) Rs. 9310.00, G.P. – Rs. 2800.00 (Net Rs. 9330.00, G.P. – Rs. 2800.00 (Net Rs. 40.00 salary due including allowances = Rs. salary paid including allowances = Rs. 18273.00) 18313.00) TOTAL Rs. 40.00 3. Gopinath Das, Electrician
Date/Month/Year Salary Due Salary Fixed Excess Payment 01.01.14 Rs. 8510.00, G.P. – Rs. 2000.00 Rs. 8510.00, G.P.- Rs. 2000.00 Nil 01.02.14 (After sanction of RACP) Rs. 8840.00, G.P. – Rs. 2400.00 (Net Rs. 8830.00, G.P. – Rs. 2400.00 (Net Rs. 19.00 salary due including allowances = Rs. salary paid including allowances = Rs. 17696.00) 17715.00) TOTAL Rs. 19.00 Hence the local authority was requested to clarify the fact of excess payment made to the above mentioned employees vide memo no. 41 dtd 08.10.14. The Local authority has also admitted the fact and has replied to recover the suggested amounts from the salary of the respective employees in the next salary bill. So Rs 400 is suggested for recovery from the respective employees and compliance reported to audit.
18.9 - Unauthorised payment of House Rent and Conveyance Allowance to contractual employees OSP 230 & 250
It is seen from the proceedings of Shree Jagannath Temple Management Committee meeting held on 04.09.2007 that contractual employees engaged through labour contractor or appointed by the temple administration are to be paid contractual pay as per their agreement. No other allowances are to be paid beyond their contract rate. But in contravention to the said agreement a sum of Rs 881172.00 has been paid to the contractual employees towards house rent and conveyance allowance through the labour contractor, M. K.Routray during the period of audit i.e., 01.04.2012 to 31.03.2014. The details of payment are given below.
PERIOD VR NO./ DT HRA & CONVEYANCE PAID (in Rs.) March' 12 13(A)/4.4.12 22661 April' 12 74/1.5.12 23100 May' 12 150/30.5.12 24100 June' 12 262/5.7.12 24100 July' 12 337/1.8.12 24100 Aug' 12 479/3.9.12 24100 Sept' 12 568/4.10.12 24100 Oct' 12 689/3.11.12 24100 Nov' 12 784/4.12.12 24100 Dec' 12 905/2.1.13 24100 Jan' 13 974/2.2.13 24100 Feb' 13 1086/6.3.13 24100 March' 13 19/8.4.13 24100 April' 13 103/4.5.13 24100 May' 13 220/31.5.13 24100 June' 13 344/2.7.13 24100 July' 13 453/5.8.13 22300 Aug' 13 595/2.9.13 22300 Sept' 13 699/3.10.13 22300 Oct' 13 840/1.11.13 87333
128 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Nov' 13 948/3.12.13 88075 Dec.13 1065/3.1.14 87066 Jan.14 1150/5.2.14 88234 Feb.14 1201/4.3.14 80403 TOTAL 881172 In spite of several verbal requests and issue of Audit Observation Memo no. 122 dtd 15.04.15 the files such as tender file on labour contract, VAT & IT clearance certificates, EPF & ESI registration and agreement between labour contractor and temple administration could not be made available to audit for the year 12 – 13 & 13 – 14.
Again it may be noted here that previous audit also called for the above mentioned records vide memo no. 143 dtd 26.09.13 to which the local authority assured to produce the same to next audit. Since till date the records could not be made available to the present audit so the local authority was once again requested to take effective steps towards production of the above said records through audit objection memo no. 134 dtd 18.04.15. In response to the audit objection memo the local authority replied that as per decision of the managing committee of Shree Jagannath Temple, contractual employees are being paid HRA & Conveyance allowance. But no such resolution was produced to audit for verification.
The reply of the local authority can not be accepted because labour contractors have been appointed through tender process and as per agreement between labour contractor and temple administration the payment should be made. So the payment towards HRA and Conveyance allowance amounting to Rs 8,81,172.00 is kept under objection till production of agreement and resolution of managing committee.
18.10 - Irregular sanction of RACP to the StaffsOSP-27
Irregular sanction of RACP to the Staffs
On checking the service book of Sri Krushna Chandra Apat,U.D.C ,it is seen that 2nd RACP has been sanctioned vide O.O.No -2133/26.2.14 in favour of sri K.C.Apat, UDC by allowing one increment@3% with GP 4200/- on 1.1.13 who has already been drawn the TBA on 29.5.2006 and getting a promotion w.e.f.1.5.12 , where his pay has been fixed on 74(b) which resulted two phase of promotional incremental benefit during the completion of 20 years of service. As per F.D. circular No-26274/8.8.13 &1738/20.1.14 in this case only GP @4200 is admissible in sanction of 2nd RACP. The local authority has admitted the objection and noted for future guidance .
2. Similarly, in case of Smt Janaki Karuna Devi,Accountant , has been allowed TBA w.e.f .25.9.96 promoted to UDC scale of pay w.e.f 14.7.04 , her pay has been fixed on 74(b) & again promoted as an accountant w.e.f.1.2.12.where her pay also fixed on 74(b).As a result , she has already been availed three phase of promotional increment before completion of 30 years of service. Hence, 3rd RACP allowed with 3%increment on 1.2.13 is not consider as admissible except GP which is admitted by the local authority.and agreed to take action according to the suggestion.
3. Similar sanction of 2nd RACP noticed in case of Smt. Sujata Mohapatra Cashier, Sri T.Basudev Mahapatra UDC ,& Smt.Saraswati Suar UDC &Sri Rama Narayan Mishra ,UDC etc. The sanction of extra incremental benefit to the aforesaid staffs and others those service book are not produced to audit after requisition may also be taken into consideration In response to audit objection memo no-18/30.7.14, the local authority has admitted the objection and noted for future guidance
18.11 -
Irregular Payment of daily wages through Private Agency
As per the last Audit Report for the year 2007-08 to 2010-11, it is seen that OSP-502-523 issued regarding irregular payment made to daily wage labourer through Private labour contractor without obtaining Govt Approval. Whether Ex- facto approval from Govt has been received in this regards.If so, this may be produced to audit for verification as complied in objection memos.
18.12 - Expenditure shown without the approval of Deputy Administrator FOSP-5-6
Expenditure shown without the approval of Deputy Administrator (F):
On Checking of voucher guard file w.r.t Cash Book for the 2012-13, it is found that the 90% of expenditure shown in the cash book
129 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
through Treasury Bill ( so called cash voucher, Bank voucher and journal voucher) attached in the guard file was neither signed by the Accountant/Head Clerk and Deputy Administrator (F).Only claimants signature is available in the treasury bill. The reason was asked through audit objection memo no-5 dated 30.5.14 regarding the expenses which were made without the approval of Deputy Administrator (F) But no reply has been furnished by the local authority Hence the local authority is suggested to discontinue such practice in future.
18.13 - Cash Payment to the Staff of Sri Jagganath Temple office OSP-41-43
Cash Payment to the Staff of Sri Jagganath Temple office:
While checking of Cash Payment Vouchers w.r.t Cash Book for the year 2012-13, it is seen that a sum of Rs.118018/- has been paid to the staff of SJTO towards their Salary, Subsistance and Medical allowance and arrear house rent allowance etc as Cash Payment instead of cheque payment as per OM no. 33563/F TRC – 32/04 & OM No. 13171/F dtd 25.03.06
As per Govt.Rule all staff should receive their salary/other claim etc through Bank credit, but Cash Payment has been made to the staff towards their salary and other claim etc which violates the Govt. Rule. The following payments are given below:
Sl.No Vr.No/Date Particulars Amount Remarks 1. 2668/1.1.13 Subas Ch. Rath, UDC towards Suspension 10920 Allowance for 12/12 2. 2563/19.12.12 Subas Ch. Rath, UDC towards Suspension 15500 Allowance 3 2669/1.1.13 Krushna Ch. Beja,Mali towards 5022 Suspension Allowance for 12/12 4. 2692/4.1.13 Siba Prasad Patra, J.T.P towards E.L 7622 dues. 5. 2638/28.12.12 Himasu Sekhar Panda, Peon towards 5984 Salary for 12/12.
6. 2649/29.12.12 Amar Bahadur Singh, JTP 1900 7. 2662/31.12.12 Prafulla Behera , Mali towards arrear bill 1920 8. 2553/18.12.12 Bhimsen Behera, Sweeper towards E.L 4207 dues 9. 2530/17.12.12 Krushna Ch. Beja, Mali towards 5022 suspension allowance 10. 2496/12.12.12 Dussasan Barik, JTP towards E.L dues 1946 11. 2388/30.11.12 Amuly Ch. Das,JTP towards E.L dues 8533 12. 2405/1.12.12 Nilakantha Mohapatra, Asst. Commander 10946 (Police) towards E.L dues 13. 2339/26.11.12 Sankar Mohapatra, J.T.P towards E.L bill 3048 14. 2322/23.11.12 Arrear House Rent Allowance to the staff 20052
i. Banalata Padhi , Peon–Rs. 6425
ii. Sujata Mohapatra, Cashier – Rs. 4758
iii. Nilakanta Sahu, Peon- Rs. 6425
iv.Kulamani Senapati, Peon –Rs. 2444 15. 2164/5.11.12 Suresh Ch. Biswal, Peon towards arrear 1909 medical bill and washing allowance 16. 2163/5.11.12 Uma Kanta Mohapatra, Dafadar towards 303 arreae pay fixation bill 17. 2074/20.10.12 Umesh Ch. Das, Sweeper towards 1909 washing and medical allowance 18. 2090/30.10.12 Sankar Das, Mali towards medical 1909 allowance 19. 2051/19.10.12 D. Patra , Rev. Peon towards arrear 3732 increment bill 20. 2054/19.10.12 R.N. Singh and others towards washing 5634 allowance Total: 118018
130 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
21 24/8.4.13 Sri Krushna Ch .Bejamali for 5022.00
subsistence Allowance 22 27/8.4.13 Sri Subash Ch.Rath UDC &Sri Birendra 10920.00 Narayan Gochhikar HC 16690.00 subsistence Allowance 23 191/24.4.13 Sri Subash Ch.Rath UDC for the 5096.00 period1.4.13to14.4.13
subsistence Allowance 24 275/4.5.13 Birendra Narayan Gochhikar HC 16698.00 subsistence Allowance total 172452.00 In support of the above expenditure only voucher/treasury bill was attached in the guard file But other related records as asked through objection memo such as Subsistance Allowance Register, Sanction Order, Manual Acquittance etc were not produced to audit..
On issue of objection memo the local authority replied that "the cash payment has been made as per personal request of payee. and urgency for payment .But in absence of above record audit could not be admitted the objection and the total amount of Rs172452.00 is suggested for recovery.from Sri Purna Chandr Jena Ex-Deputy Administrator (F) & Sri Harihara Das Mohapatra,Accountantand Sri Binod Kumar Panda EX-Deputy Administrator (F) and Sri Pradyumna Kumar Tripathy ,Deputy Administrator (F) are held responsible .
18.14 - Asset and liability position
Sl no Liability Value sl no- Assets Value
1. Unspent balance of grants Nil 1 Cash in -hand/ in Treasury/ in Bank/ 63190877.79 in Post office
2 Loans refundable Nil Investment C.B.as on 31.3.14 2781971481 3 Unremitted Govt dues (Royaity, 544178 Advance recoverable 29398785 VAT, Cess,& IT)
2 Refundable deposits ( S.D.&E.M.D.) Nil Recoverable 119578140 amount as suggested by Audit 5 Unpaid salary and wages for 3/14 3611465 6 Unpaid bills (Electricity and 1182240 Telephone)
7 Contributions payable (CPF and 3226860 EPF) for 12-13 to 13-14)
8 Others nil TOTAL 8564743 TOTAL 2994139283.79 Asset over liability -8564743 2985574540.79
From the above mentioned data , the asset position is much more higher than the liability position. Hence the financial position of the temple is sound.
18.15 -
PARA: 19 AUDIT OF LOAN/DEPOSITS/CPF INCLUDING POSITIONS
131 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
19.1 - DEPOSITS
During the year under audit i.e., 2012 – 13 & 13 – 14 the position of govt. deposits realized from the vouchers/work bill and deposited to the proper quarter have been given in the table below. The balance amount to be deposited as on 31.03.14 may be deposited to the govt. and compliance reported to audit.
GOVERNMENT DEPOSITS FOR THE YEAR 2012 - 13
Sl. No. Item To be deposited Collected Total Amount To be deposited as on To whom paid Deposited 31.03.13
1VAT 75438 348781 424219 383576 40643Commercial Tax Officer
2CESS 18228 67871 86099 78210 7889Labour Commissioner
3TDS 46165 705504 751669 714332 37337Income Tax Officer
4TCS 1793738 1761093 3554831 3554831 0Income Tax Officer
GOVERNMENT DEPOSITS FOR THE YEAR 2013 - 14
Sl. No. Item To be deposited Collected Total Amount To be deposited as on To whom paid Deposited 31.03.13
1VAT 40643 385961 426604 306859 119745Commercial Tax Officer
2CESS 7889 88274 96163 56930 39233Labour Commissioner
3TDS 37334 708796 746130 746130 0Income Tax Officer
4TCS 0 2534959 2534959 2149759 385200Income Tax Officer
19.2 - Security Deposits/ Refunded
During the year under audit i.e., 12 – 13 & 13 – 14 a total sum of Rs 30967689.00 has been collected from different contractors, lease holders, works bill etc. towards security money and Rs 33818900.00 has been refunded as per the main cash book and security deposit ledger. The detail of deposits and refunded amounts is given below.
Sl. Year of Account S.D./ E.M.D./ I.S.D. Collected S.D./ E.M.D./ I.S.D. Refunded No.
12012 - 13 15036765 16130888
22013 - 14 15930924 17688012
TOTAL 30967689 33818900
As seen from the above table, security deposit refunded in both the years is more than the security deposit received. Since audit of accounts for the year 2011 - 12 has not been conducted. Security deposit to be refunded as on 01.04.2012 could not be ascertained. As security deposit ledger has not been maintained properly, the amount of security deposit to be refunded could not be calculated by the Audit.
19.3 - Non Realisation of Security Deposit from the staffs handling cash
As per Rule 32 of Financial Regulations under Shree Jagannath Temple Administration Act, 1952 the Accountant shall furnish cash security of Rs 500.00 and personal security of Rs 1000.00. Similarly, all persons of the temple administration on dealing with cash, that is Tahasildar, Moharir, Naib Tahasildar, Cashier and fees collectors shall furnish cash security of Rs 500.00 and property personal security of Rs
132 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
5000.00 in the bond as prescribed.
But this rule has not been followed as a result of which no security money has been collected from the staff handling cash, stock & stores. However, cash security may be realized from the staff dealing with cash, stock & stores and compliance reported.
19.4 - Non deduction of security deposits from the work bill (OSP 288)
During the year under audit i.e. 12 – 13 & 13 – 14 security deposit amounting to Rs 25475.00 has not been deducted from the work bill as detailed below:
Vr. No./ Dt. Amount (in Rs.) S.D. to be deducted (5% of bill Name of the work amount) 152/ 02.06.12 19991.00 890.00 Renovation of temple branch office 153/ 02.06.12 15504.00 775.00 Supply & fitting of G.I. pipe barricade 1233/ 11.03.14 254760.00 12738.00 Providing stainless steel at Sri Mandir 1250/ 13.03.14 80331.00 4017.00 Providing shade for D.G. set 1251/ 13.03.14 141097.00 7055.00 Const. of kitchen shade for Sri Gundicha Bhakta Niwas TOTAL 511683.00 25475.00 In this regard the local authority was requested to state the reason of non-deduction of S.D. from the above said bills through audit objection memo no. 155 dtd 25.04.15. In response no reply has been received yet.Hence Rs 25475.00is kept under objection till clarification.
19.5 - Non – Deposit of Govt. dues (OSP 272)
As per the rule Rule 6 of OTC Vol I r/w Rule 4 of OGFR Vol I all money received/ realized on behalf of Govt. should be deposited in full into the govt. treasury/ competent authority within 3 working days of realization.
In contravention to the above quoted rule during the financial years 2012 – 13 & 2013 – 14, Rs 21631.00 & Rs 23008.00 respectively have been deducted towards Royality as seen from the paid vouchers (works) but the realized amount has not been deposited in the Govt. treasury till date.
The reason of non-deposit of govt. dues to the treasury has been asked through audit objection memo no. 145 dtd 23.04.15. In response, the local authority has not given any reply. In absence of compliance the objection stands on its own merit and the entire amount of Rs 44639.00 is held under objection till deposit in the govt. treasury.
19.6 - Non-Deposit of C.P.F. (OSP 227)
On scrutiny of the pay acquittance of regular employees of it is found that during the year 2012 – 13 and 2013 – 14, a sum of Rs 3226860.00 has been deducted from the gross salary as Employee share towards C.P.F. the detail of monthly deductions is given here-under. But the same amount along with the Employer share has not been deposited in the C.P.F. a/cs of the concerned employee. As a result of which the employees sustained a loss of interest for the period 2012 – 13 & 2013 – 14.
Hence the local authority was requested to take immediate and necessary steps towards deposit of the C.P.F and compliance reported to audit through audit objection memo no. 116 dtd 10.04.15. But till closure the local authority has not furnished any reply. Hence Rs 3226860.00 is held under objection till deposit of the same.
Month & Year Amount in Rs.
April' 12 131820 May' 12 136500 June' 12 134160 July' 12 135720
133 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
Aug' 12 139620 Sept' 12 141180 Oct' 12 134160 Nov' 12 134940 Dec' 12 137280 Jan' 13 132600 Feb' 13 134940 March' 13 131820 April' 13 134940 May' 13 131820 June' 13 137280 July' 13 133380 Aug' 13 135720 Sept' 13 134160 Oct' 13 133380 Nov' 13 130260 Dec' 13 133380 Jan' 14 131040 Feb' 14 134940 March' 14 131820 TOTAL 3226860
PARA: 20 RESULT OF AUDIT
20.1 -
A sum of Rs289802473.79 has been kept under objection out of which a sum of Rs 119578139.79 is suggested for recovery and Rs 83111.00 has been recovered at the time of audit.
Result Of Audit Sl Name Of The Amount Amount kept on Amount Amount Amount Remarks No Paragraph suggested for objection(In Rs:) Surchargeable(I Embezzlement(I Othercases(In recovery(In Rs:) n Rs:) n Rs:) Rs:) 1 4.1 28122.00 28122.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 6.1 7498.00 13640746.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 7.1 223746.00 223746.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 8.1 924840.00 12184161.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 11.4 531.00 531.00 0.00 531.00 0.00 6 11.5 1785.00 15785.00 0.00 15785.00 0.00 7 11.6 666.00 666.00 0.00 666.00 0.00 8 11.10 1020.00 1020.00 0.00 1020.00 0.00 9 11.12 840.00 840.00 0.00 840.00 0.00 10 11.13 4583.00 4583.00 0.00 4583.00 0.00 11 11.14 2000.00 2000.00 0.00 2000.00 0.00 12 11.15 17000.00 17000.00 0.00 17000.00 0.00 13 12.1 13484.00 13484.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14 12.2 74409.00 74409.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 12.3 60858.00 60858.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16 12.4 8942.00 8942.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17 12.5 3037.00 3037.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
134 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
18 12.6 5115.00 5115.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 12.7 77562.00 77562.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20 12.8 1403.00 1403.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21 12.9 5824.00 5824.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22 12.10 64125.79 64125.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 23 12.11 18345.00 18345.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24 12.12 146960.00 146960.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25 12.13 330.00 330.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26 12.16 20.00 20.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27 12.17 843988.00 843988.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28 12.18 1397.00 1397.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29 13.3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30 13.5 122000.00 122000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31 13.6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32 13.7 323205.00 2020048.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33 13.8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34 13.9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35 13.10 3354.00 3354.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 36 13.11 12805.00 12805.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37 13.12 2428.00 2428.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38 13.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39 13.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 40 13.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41 13.16 37442080.00 37442080.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 42 13.17 4874582.00 25341370.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 43 13.18 66072026.00 66072026.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 44 13.19 0.00 41322.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 45 13.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 46 13.21 7181.00 7181.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47 13.22 0.00 9563415.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48 13.23 0.00 40068680.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49 13.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50 13.29 105440.00 105440.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51 13.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 52 14.1 5850.00 5850.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 53 14.3 0.00 1611600.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 54 14.4 249050.00 249050.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55 14.6 723492.00 723492.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 56 14.7 1627855.00 32927235.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57 14.8 33281.00 33281.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 58 14.9 85650.00 85650.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 59 14.10 13200.00 13200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60 14.12 699328.00 7449328.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 61 14.14 21472.00 64416.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 62 14.15 15280.00 152820.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 63 14.17 0.00 14816833.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 64 14.18 0.00 383930.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65 14.19 450.00 9000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 66 14.21 0.00 99134.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 67 14.22 7380.00 7380.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 68 14.24 54454.00 54454.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 69 14.26 2030.00 2030.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 70 14.28 1500.00 1500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 71 14.30 10581.00 10581.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 72 14.31 12594.00 12594.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 73 14.32 1222.00 1222.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 74 14.33 34320.00 34320.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 75 14.35 12170.00 12170.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76 14.37 0.00 74711.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 77 15.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 78 15.2 828129.00 828129.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 79 15.4 4756.00 124225.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 80 15.5 38432.00 38432.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 81 15.6 30208.00 119954.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 82 15.7 9069.00 9069.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
135 / 136 AUDIT REPORT 30-09-2015
83 15.8 6395.00 6395.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 84 15.9 0.00 81206.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 85 15.10 3345684.00 8273870.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 86 15.11 0.00 6932757.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 87 18.1 0.00 12708349.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 88 18.4 0.00 9606959.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 89 18.6 0.00 70567.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 90 18.7 27948.00 27948.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 91 18.8 400.00 400.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 92 18.9 0.00 881172.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 93 18.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 94 18.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95 18.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 96 18.13 172452.00 172452.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 97 19.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 98 19.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 99 19.3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100 19.4 0.00 25475.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 101 19.5 0.00 44639.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 102 19.6 0.00 3226860.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 119578163.79 310261787.79 0.00 42425.00 0.00
Audit Certificate
Cetrified that the accounts of Shree Jaganatha Temple Puri. for the financial year 2012-2013 2013-2014 have been covered under audit and found correct subject to the comments / remarks offered in the foregoing paragraphs .
Spot Recovery Sl No Ref Para No/Audit Objection M.R.No Date Amount(In Rs:) Name of the person Statement Page No 1 0000-00-00 0 2 Para 13.21/OSP158 tyo 160 6066 2015-03-10 65280 Hari Hara Swain, Collection-in-charge 3 0000-00-00 0 4 0000-00-00 0 5 10433 2015-08-01 185 Arun Kr. Panigrahi 6 Para13.27/OSP192 10374 2015-07-29 5156 Arun Kr. Panigrahi 7 327 2013-07-25 350 Arun Kr. Panigrahi 8 Para 13.26/OSP190 to 191 10373 2015-07-29 150 Arun Kr. Panigrahi 9 Para 13.21/OSP160 3191 2013-09-12 4168 Hari Hara Swain, Collection-in-charge 10 Para 11.11/OSP16 3074 2014-04-20 295 Anil Kumar Patra, Pub. Clerk 11 Para 11.9/OSP84 4141 2014-11-26 451 Lingaraj Rath, Fees Collector 12 Para 11.5/OSP189. 94 2015-01-08 1300 Arun Kr. Panigrahi 13 76 2015-01-08 300 Arun Kr. Panigrahi 14 Para 11.11/ OSP no. 16 3074 2014-09-20 295 Anil Kumar Patra, Pub. Clerk 15 Para 11.7/ OSP no. 15 3074 2014-09-20 50 Anil Kumar Patra, Pub. Clerk 16 Para 12.15/ OSP no. 50 435 2015-04-29 550 Subash Chandra Rath, UDC 17 Para 11.9/ OSP no. 84 4141 2014-11-26 451 Lingaraj Rath, Fees Collector 18 Para 11.8/ OSP no. 51 4534 2014-11-29 75 Chatrubhuja Barik, Fees Collector 19 Para 11.1/ OSP no. 106 467 2015-04-30 3000 Pradipta Kr. Mishra, Collection -in-charge 20 Para 11.2/ OSP no. 172 515 2015-05-02 155 Satya Narayan Mohanty, Coll. Clerk 21 Para 11.3/ OSP no. 240 458 2015-04-30 900 Anil Kumar Patra, Pub. Clerk 22 0000-00-00 0 23 0000-00-00 0 24 0000-00-00 0 Total83111
136 / 136
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)