122
KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN AND GUJARAT VIDYAPITH
MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE (2018-19)
ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY SECOND REPORT
SIXTEENTH LOK SABHA
LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT 8_ NEW DELHI
NEW DELHInew LY
2 PAC NO. 2161
ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-SECOND REPORT
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE (2018-19)
SIXTEENTH LOK SABHA
KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN AND
GUJARAT VIDYAPITH
MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
Presented to Lok Sabha on: 18.12.2018
Laid in Rajya Sabha on: 18.12.2018
L O K S A B H A S E C R E T A R I A T N E W D E L H I
December, 2018/ Agrahayana, 1940 (Saka)
3
CONTENTS
PAGE NO. COMPOSITION OF THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE (2018-19) COMPOSITION OF THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE (2017-18) INTRODUCTION PART - I Introduction I Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan - Irregular expenditure on Project KendriyaVidyalayas II Irregular payment of Service Tax III Gujarat Vidyapith A. Non follow up of norms of reservation. B. Irregularities in Appointments and Drawl of pay scales for various posts PART - II Observations/Recommendations of the Committee APPENDICES I. Minutes of the Eighth sitting of the Public Accounts Committee (2017-18) held on 23 August, 2017 II. Minutes of the Tenth sitting of the Public Accounts Committee (2017-18) held on 27 September, 2017 III. Minutes of the Twentieth sitting of the Public Accounts Committee (2018-19) held on 5 December, 2018
4
COMPOSITION OF THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE (2018-19)
Shri Mallikarjun Kharge - Chairperson
MEMBERS LOK SABHA 2. Shri Subhash Chandra Baheria
3. Shri Sudip Bandyopadhyay 4. Shri Prem Singh Chandumajra 5. Shri Gajanan Chandrakant Kirtikar
6. Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab 7. Smt. Riti Pathak 8. Shri Ramesh Pokhriyal “Nishank” 9. Shri Janardan Singh Sigriwal 10. Shri Abhishek Singh
11. Shri Gopal Shetty 12. Dr. Kirit Somaiya 13. Shri Anurag Singh Thakur
14. Shri Shivkumar Chanabasappa Udasi 15. Dr. Ponnusamy Venugopal
RAJYA SABHA 16. Prof. M. V. Rajeev Gowda
17. Shri Bhubaneswar Kalita 18. Shri Shwait Malik 19. Shri Narayan Lal Panchariya
20. Shri Sukhendu Sekhar Roy 21. Shri C.M.Ramesh 22. Shri Bhupender Yadav
SECRETARIAT
1. Shri A.K. Singh - Additional Secretary 2. Shri T. JayaKumar - Director 3. Smt. Bharti S. Tuteja - Deputy Secretary 4. Smt. Malvika Mehta - Committee Officer
5
COMPOSITION OF THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE (2017-18)
Shri Mallikarjun Kharge - Chairperson MEMBERS
LOK SABHA
2. Shri Sudip Bandyopadhyay
3. Shri Subhash Chandra Baheria 4. Shri Prem Singh Chandumajra 5. Shri Nishikant Dubey 6. Shri Gajanan Chandrakant Kirtikar 7. Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab 8. Smt. Riti Pathak 9. Vacant1 10. Shri Abhishek Singh 11. Prof. Ram Shanker 12. Dr. Kirit Somaiya 13. Shri Anurag Singh Thakur 14. Shri Shivkumar C. Udasi 15. Dr. P. Venugopal
RAJYA SABHA
16. Vacant2 17. Vacant3 18. Shri Bhubaneswar Kalita 19. Shri Mohd. Ali Khan4 20. Shri Sukhendu Sekhar Roy5 21. Vacant6 22. Vacant7
1 Shri Neiphiu Rioh Ceased to be a Member of Committee consequent upon acceptance of his resignation from Lok Sabha w.e.f. 22 February, 2018. 2 Shri Naresh Agrawal ceased to be a Member of Committee consequent upon his retirement from Rajya Sabha on 2 April, 2018 3 Shri Satyavrat Chaturvedi ceased to be a Member of Committee consequent upon his retirement from Rajya Sabha on 2 April, 2018 4 Elected w.e.f. 29 December, 2017 in lieu of vacancy caused due to retirement of Shri Shantaram Naik. 5 ceased to be a Member of Committee consequent upon his retirement from Rajya Sabha on 18 August, 2017 and re-elected w.e.f. 29 December, 2017. 6 Shri Ajay Sancheti ceased to be a Member of Committee consequent upon his retirement from Rajya Sabha on 2 April, 2018 7 Shri Bhupender Yadav ceased to be a Member of Committee consequent upon his retirement from Rajya Sabha on 3 April, 2018 6
INTRODUCTION
I, the Chairperson, Public Accounts Committee (2018-19), having been authorised by the Committee, do present this One Hundred and Twenty-second Report (Sixteenth Lok Sabha) on 'Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and Gujarat Vidyapith' based on Para Nos. 13.3, 13.7 & 13.11 of C&AG Report No. 12 of 2017 relating to the Ministry of Human Resource Development.
2. The C&AG Report No. 12 of 2017 was laid on the Table of the House on 21 July, 2017.
3. The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) selected Paras 13.3, 13.7 & 13.11 of C&AG Report No. 12 of 2017 for examination in 2017-18 and was further selected and examined by PAC in 2018-19.
4. The Public Accounts Committee (2017-18) took oral evidence of the representatives of Ministry of Human Resource Development on aforementioned paras on 23 August, 2017 and 27 September, 2017.
5. The Public Accounts Committee (2018-19) considered and adopted the One Hundred and Twenty-second Report on the afore-mentioned paras from C&AG Report at their sitting held on 5 December, 2018. The Minutes of the sittings are appended to the Report.
6. For facility of reference and convenience, the Observations and Recommendations of the Committee have been printed in bold and form Part II of the Report.
7. The Committee would like to express their thanks to the representatives of the Ministry of Human Resource Development for tendering evidence before them and furnishing the requisite information to the Committee in connection with the examination of the subject.
8. The Committee also place on record their appreciation of the assistance rendered to them in the matter by the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.
NEW DELHI; Mallikarjun Kharge 13 December, 2018 Chairperson 22 Agrahayana, 1940 (Saka) Public Accounts Committee
7
Part-I
Report
Introduction
1. The Public Accounts Committee decided to take up for detailed examination and report, Paras 13.3,13.7 and 13.11 of Audit Report no. 12 of 2017 (Compliance Audit Observations Union Government (Civil) on ‘Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS)’, ‘Irregular payment of Service Tax’ and ‘Gujarat Vidyapith (GVP)’ respectively pertaining to the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD).
I Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan - Irregular expenditure on Project KendriyaVidyalayas
2. According to Audit, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, an autonomous body under Ministry of Human Resource Development establishes and manages Kendriya Vidyalayas (KV). The scheme of KV had also been extended to the children of the employees of Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs)/Institute of Higher Learning owned by Government of India (GoI), at their request on the condition that all recurring and non- recurring expenditure on running these Vidyalayas would be provided by the sponsoring agencies. The annual requirements of school are required to be met by the sponsoring agency by release of budgeted funds, both recurring and non-recurring to the concerned KVs in bank account as advance in two installments i.e. in April and October of the current financial year under intimation to the Regional office and KVS, Headquarters.
3. In this regard, the Ministry submitted the following in their background note with regard to the objectives of the Kendriya Vidyalayas:-
“The main objectives of Kendriya Vidyalayas are as under: To cater to the educational needs of the children of transferable Central Government employees including Defence and Para-Military Personnel by providing a common programme of education. To provide, establish, endow, maintain, control and manage schools, hereinafter called ‘the Kendriya Vidyalayas’ for the children of transferable employees of the Government of India, floating population and others including those living in remote and undeveloped locations of the country and to do all acts and things necessary for or conducive to the promotion of such schools. To pursue excellence and set pace in the field of school education; 8
To initiate and promote experimentation and innovativeness in education in collaboration with other bodies like the CBSE, NCERT etc., and To develop the spirit of national integration and create a sense of ‘Indianness’ among children.” 4. With regard to opening of Project KVs, the Ministry submitted the following:-
“Kendriya Vidyalayas can be opened either in the Civil / Defence Sector or under the Project / IHL Sector. Proposals for opening of new KV is considered only if sponsored by one of the following:- (a) Ministries or Departments of the Government of India (b) State Governments c) Union Territories Administrations.
Opening of Kendriya Vidyalayas under Project/ IHL Sector Apart from Civil/ Defence Sector, the Central Public Sector Undertakings/Institutes of Higher Learning (IHL)can also sponsor the Kendriya Vidyalayas subject to the following:
a) The Public Sector undertaking/Institutions of Higher Learning shall bear all the recurring and non-recurring expenditure on the proposed Kendriya Vidyalaya. The administrative overhead charges from the sponsoring project/ IHL authorities will be charged @ 15% of the actual expenditure of the Project/ IHL Sector Vidyalaya. The administrative overhead charges shall be charged @15% of the actual expenditure of the project Vidyalaya.
b) When there is concentration of at least 1000 employees of the Govt. of India undertaking, and when there are at least 200 children (500 children in the case of big cities) willing to be enrolled in different classes of the proposed Kendriya Vidyalayas to begin with.
c) The Sponsoring Authority shall provide free of cost, suitable land and building for housing and future development of the Vidyalaya.
d) The Sponsoring Authority shall provide suitable residential accommodation to the teaching and non-teaching staff of KVS on the same basis and at the same rates as prescribed by it for its own employees.
e) The children of the Sponsoring Authority will get first priority in matters of admission. However, the children belonging to the eligible categories will be considered against seats available after accommodating the children of the employees of the Sponsoring Authority.
Proposals received from the Public Sector undertakings for opening of new Kendriya Vidyalayas in their campuses are considered on fulfillment of certain terms and conditions devised by KVS in the form of an MOU. The recurring and non-recurring expenditure including proportionate overhead charges and future development expenditure are met by the PSUs/ Institutes of Higher Learning besides providing of 9
suitable and sufficient land, building, furniture, equipment and residential accommodation for the staff of the proposed K.V.
The essential difference between a KV opened under the Civil / Defence sector and that under Project / IHL sector is that the former is established with the approval of the Government where as in the latter case, the school is established through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) entered into between the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan on the one part and the Public sector Undertaking / IHL on the other part.
Some of the projects have become sick and the project authorities are increasingly finding it difficult to discharge their liabilities in respect of the KV under their sponsorships. Keeping in view such constraints faced by the project authorities, the KVS has authorized project authorities to prescribe / charge a differential fee structure vis-à-vis other civil sector KVs which will enable them to generate additional resources for meeting their liabilities towards KVS. In the eventuality of their failure to generate funds by these means, for whatsoever reasons, the sponsoring agencies would be liable to pay their dues to KVS from their own resources.”
5. With regard to funding of the Project KVs, the Ministry submitted as under:- “Funding of Project Kendriya Vidyalayas Project Schools are opened after the sponsoring authorities make available land and building for the running of school and sufficient number of residential quarters etc. for the staff posted there. The annual requirements of the school are required to be met by the sponsoring agency by release of budgeted funds to the KVS/Regional Office in two advance installments in the month of April and October.
The entire recurring and non-recurring expenditure in respect of Project school which is payable by the concerned authority to the Sangathan is inclusive of proportionate Administrative Overhead Charges relating to the Hqrs. and Regional Offices.”
6. In CAG’s earlier Audit Report No. 4 of 2004, Audit had highlighted non-payment of dues by the sponsoring Authorities as an amount of ` 12.73 crore and ` 11.84 crore was outstanding as at March 2003 from existing/functioning Project Vidyalayas and closed Project Vidyalayas respectively. Subsequently, PAC, in its Forty Sixth Report of 2006-07 advised that the matter be resolved early by MHRD in co-ordination with other Departments of GoI with a view to recover the amount due to KVS. The Committee further recommended that KVS should be cautious in future and also reconsider their policy of opening and running such project schools involving PSUs so as to avoid recurrence of such instances.
7. Audit examination in July 2015 and July 2016 disclosed that as of March 2016 there were 161 Project Vidyalayas of which dues of ` 59.67 crore were recoverable 10 from 34 closed and 47 operating Vidyalayas. Audit observed that in cases where the Sponsoring Authority defaulted in making the required payments, KVS diverted the Government grants to meet the expenditure towards pay & allowance of the staff and other recurring and non-recurring expenditure. 8. The outstanding amount of Closed Project Vidyalayas were between `14.61 crore to ` 15.10 crore during 2011-12 to 2015-16 and have increased from `11.22 crore in 2011-12 to `44.56 crore in 2015-16 in respect of existing Vidyalayas. The regular practice of diversion of Government grants is not only financially imprudent but also against the canons of Budgetary Management and Expenditure Control. This would also adversely impact the core objective for which such budget was allotted. Even though the matter was brought to the notice of Management/Ministry in CAG Report No. 4 of 2004 and specific recommendations of 46th PAC Report of 2006-07 that the matter be resolved early by MHRD in co-ordination with other Departments of GoI with a view to recovering the amount due to KVS, KVS has not streamlined its recovery process since the recovery from closed projects increased from ` 11.84 crore to ` 15.10 crore and for existing Vidyalayas increased from ` 12.73 crore to ` 44.56 crore from March ending 2003 to March ending 2016 respectively.
9. KVS, in its reply stated in July 2016 and August 2016 that it was regularly monitoring the issue and this was being taken up at the level of Commissioner, and Hon’ble HRM-cum-Chairman, KVS and Hon’ble Ministers incharge of other ministries under whom the project schools are functioning. It was further added that efforts of Administrative Ministry resulted in recovery of an amount of ` 1.83 crore.
10. The Ministry stated the following with regard to difficulties being faced by KVs:- “Difficulties faced by KVS ● Since the employees posted in Kendriya Vidyalayas are permanent employees of KVS and their pay and allowances have to be paid in time, KVS has been releasing funds to such few defaulting KVs as an advance out of Government Grants to ensure release of salaries to KVS employees.
● Although, the said amount is given as an advance to the Project Authorities, the same has attracted serious audit objection by CAG, Govt. of India. If such schools continue to function the outstanding dues will increase year after year.
● After some years of existence of Kendriya Vidyalaya under Project/IHL Sector, the sponsoring authorities of these KVs started defaulting from funding of the KV on one or the other ground and the KVS dues starts accumulating. They request KVS either to convert the Vidyalaya into Civil Sector or to close it. The extant guidelines, however, do not have any such provision for conversion of a Project sector KV into a Civil Sector KV. 11
● The grounds which are normally adduced by the sponsoring authorities are non-availability of funds due to loss in the business of the company, the wards of the employees of said project getting reduced, closing of project in phased manner, intention of the project authorities of establishing another organization school with a view to reduce the expenditure etc.
● Since the KVS assignment is to cater to the educational needs of children, the abrupt decision of closure of the KV cannot be taken in the interest of the education of the children, who are studying in the said KV. In case, such decision is taken by KVS, as KVS do not receive any grant from Govt. of India for running such KVs, parents/ public representatives approach KVS authorities to continue the Vidyalaya. This results in accumulation of outstanding dues in the name of project/IHL authorities.”
11. In the context of the efforts put in to recover the outstanding dues, the following was submitted by the Ministry:- “A) The Secretary, School Education and Literacy (SE&L),MHRD conducted a meeting on 05.04.2017 with the representatives of various Ministries whose PSUs have sponsored Kendriya Vidyalayas and Officers of KVS to expedite the recovery of outstanding dues from the Sponsored Projects. After review of cases, the Secretary (SE&L) directed the Commissioner, KVS to reconcile and recover the outstanding dues from the Sponsored Projects of KVs as well as to discuss the other issue raised vice-versa with the representatives of the concerned sponsoring authorities in KVS (Hqrs), New Delhi.
i) In accordance with the above decision, meeting was conducted on four different dates namely 18.05.2017, 19.05.2017, 22.05.2017 & 24.05.2017 under the Chairmanship of Additional Commissioner (Admn.) in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (HQ) with the Officers of different Project Authorities to sort out the issues and recovery of outstanding dues from the Sponsored Projects.
ii) The issue was further discussed in the Deputy Commissioners’ Conference recently held in the First week of July, 2017 and decisions arrived at are as under :-
a) All Regional Offices should communicate the outstanding balance recoverable as on 31.03.2017 to the concerned Project Authority for its confirmation ;
b) In case of any differences pointed out by the Project Authority, the Finance Officer/Assistant Commissioner working in the Region concerned should be deputed to the concerned Project Authority for its reconciliation;
c) All Deputy Commissioners are directed to personally interact with the concerned Project Authority for the immediate recovery of overdue amount.
B) As per the decision taken in the Deputy Commissioner’s Conference, a letter has also been issued to all Regional Offices on 03.08.2017 enclosing a 12
statement of outstanding dues as on 31.03.2017 for confirming the outstanding dues in consultation with Project Authorities. To monitor the recovery effectively from project authority, all Regional Offices have been directed vide this office letter dated 27.07.2017 to forward the monthly Report to KVS(HQ).
C) In 4 Project Kendriya Vidyalayas namely KV, BHEL Haridwar, BHEL Jagdishpur, FRI Dehradun and Central University of Hyderabad fresh admissions in Class 1 and XI have been stopped for the year 2017-18 on the request of sponsoring authorities as they have expressed their inability in funding the Kendriya Vidyalayas w.e.f. 01.04.2017 and also requested to convert into Civil Sector. However, keeping the interest of students and parents admissions have been restored, with the approval of Hon’ble Human Resource Minister (HRM).”
12. Regarding recoveries, MHRD further added the following:- “..while in some cases, the Sponsoring Authorities have made part payments towards dues during the intervening years, in other cases (especially in closed KVs) there is no payment at all during the last 10 years.”
13. On being asked if the MOU between KVS and the Sponsoring Authority provided for measures to be taken when any sponsoring authority backs off from a project, MHRD replied the following:- “That in case, Clause 12 & 14 of the Memorandum of Understanding has sufficient provisions both for sponsor and KVS. Clause 12 provides as under:- "That in case, the party of the other part fails to comply with all or any of the commitments given hereinabove, the Sangathan is free to take such decision as may suit its convenience and such decision shall be final, binding upon the party of other part. However, it is provided that KV shall not be allowed to be closed for the breach committed by the party of the other part and in case such a situation arises, it shall be the duty on the part of the other part to pay damages and keep the Sangathan indemnified." In the MoU, KVS is the party of one part and the Sponsoring Project Authority is the party of the other part. Also clause 14 of the MoU provides as under:- "It is also provided that in case of any dispute arising out of this MoU, the same shall be referred to a sole arbitrator for his/her decision as per the law in force and the appointment of the sole arbitrator shall be carried out by the Commissioner KVS whose decision in this regard will be final and binding between the parties." It may be added that most of the defaulting Sponsoring Authorities are in respect of Kendriya Vidyalayas opened before 2007 when the system of MoU was not in practice.”
14. In this context, when asked that paying for increasing expenses without any matching earnings from that project would become uninteresting for any sponsoring authority, MHRD submitted the following:- “Yes…However, as per clause 12 of the MoU a Project Sector KV is not to be closed for the breach committed by the Sponsoring Project. In such a situation it 13
shall be the duty of the Sponsoring Project to pay damages & keep KVS indemnified. In view of above provision in the MoU and also in the interest of studies of students of such KVs, KVS pays for the salary and allowances of its staff as a loan to the Kendriya Vidyalaya. Simultaneously, KVS keeps pressing the defaulting Sponsoring Project Authorities to clear its dues.”
15. On being queried whether existing students were allowed to complete their schooling till 12th in case of closure of KVs, MHRD responded as under:- “KVS, as far as possible, tries to close down Kendriya Viyalayas in a phased manner on the request of Sponsoring Project Authorities. However, in a situation where the sponsoring authority concerned backs out from their commitment abruptly and KVS has no option but to close the KV, the existing students pursuing their studies are adjusted in nearby Kendriya Vidyalayas or any KV as per their choice.”
16. When asked that in case a particular sponsoring authority has been defaulting whether the Ministry tried to persuade some other PSU etc. to run the KV in larger public interest and if the Ministry thought other Corporate entities in the area could be made to contribute towards such schools under the Corporate Social Responsibility initiative, the Ministry replied:- “The Project Sector Kendriya Vidyalayas are opened on the request of the Sponsoring Project Authorities in their campuses on certain terms and conditions as per the MoU since 2007. Before 2007, Project Sector KVs were opened on mutually agreed terms and conditions without any MoU. Their wards are given first priority in admissions. KVS will explore the possibility of other PSUs/corporate entities offering to take the responsibility of funding of such Kendriya Vidalayas under Corporate Social Responsibility initiative. Further, no other PSU/Corporate entities ever made such an offer to KVS.
Incidentally, the Ministry had, in the case of a KV run under the sponsorship of University of Hyderabad, advised that, in the event the University finds supporting the KV financially burdensome, they may ascertain the feasibility of other organisations like Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR), National Institute of Animal Biotechnology (NIAB), National institute of Design (NID), Indian Immunologicals Limited (IIL) etc. to contribute their share of operating and maintenance cost on certain formula to be developed by them. Ministry welcomes such possibilities being explored by other similarly placed project authorities also.”
17. In the context of MoUs with Project authorities, the Ministry also stated the following:- “Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan placed the matter of default by some Project Sponsoring Authorities in payment of KVS dues before the Board of Governors, KVS in its 77th meeting held on 20.06.2007. BOG, KVS decided signing of Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Sponsoring Project Authorities 14
for Kendriya Vidyalayas under Project Sector. This MoU is being signed between the sponsoring authority and KVS in respect of all new Project Sector KVs opened after 2007. Further, BoG, KVS in its 79th meeting held on 26.06.2008, approved the inclusion of a clause "The concerned Ministry, through its Secretary shall also convey their concurrence to the Memorandum of Understanding through a separate letter" in the MoU format. KVS is taking the concurrence as above in all cases before opening of new Project Sector KVs since then.”
18. On the issues of opening of escrow account by Project Authority, making the administrative ministry as a financial guarantor and amendments in the MoU and norms for opening of new Project KVs, the Ministry submitted the following in their action taken reply to Audit :-
“It has also been indicated by the KVS that it has emphasized on the issue of opening of Escrow Account by the Project Authorities those who have opened the Project KVs after the decision of BOG, KVS dated 20.6.2007. The Deputy Commissioners, KVS, Regional Offices have been directed to look into the issue of opening of Escrow Account to ensure compliance immediately. While entering into MoU for opening up of KV, the MoU shall be tripartite involving the concerned administrative Ministry also which should also stand as a guarantor to make payment of dues to KVS in the event of default by the Project Authorities. KVS has committed before the Public Accounts Committee that Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan would propose to its Board of Governors the additional remedial measures in respect of opening of new Kendriya Vidyalayas under Project/IHL Sector to avoid the default by any sponsoring Project/IHL Authorities. In compliance, KVS has drawn certain amendments/parameters in the existing norms prescribed for opening of new Kendriya Vidyalayas under Project/IHL Sector. Draft agenda has also been prepared for its submission before the competent body i.e. Board of Governors, KVS.” 19. In regard to differential fee structure in Project KVs, MHRD stated the following:- “There is a provision that Sponsoring Authorities of Project Kendriya Vidyalayas can frame a different fee structure than that of Civil Sector Kendriya Vidyalayas. However, Sponsoring Authorities of Project Kendriya Vidyalayas adopt the fee structure fixed by Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan for Civil/Defence Kendriya Vidyalayas. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan is also contemplating revision of fee structure. This will augment funds of project sector KVs also, as and when implemented.”
II Irregular payment of Service Tax
20. According to Audit, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India exempted certain services provided to or by educational institutions from service 15 tax with effect from 1 July 2012 (Notification No. 25/2012-Service Tax dated 20 June 2012). The notification clarified that exempted services inter alia includes any services which educational institutions ordinarily carry out themselves but may obtain as outsourced services from any other person. Ministry of Finance further clarified that by virtue of the entry in the negative list, it was clear that all services relating to education are exempt from service tax (circular no.172/7/2013-ST dated 19 September 2013). These services also include hostels, construction, housekeeping, security services, canteen etc. 21. Audit observed that in five institutes, services provided by the contractors towards rendering of services such as security, construction, housekeeping and catering, etc. were exempted from payment of service tax, but paid ` 12.42 crore as service tax. 22. IIT Roorkee replied (April 2016) that services rendered by Bedi & Bedi Associates and Sybex Computer Systems (P) Ltd. are not exempt under aforesaid notification. The payment of service tax to Peregrine Guarding Pvt. Ltd. has been discontinued from August 2015. BBAU replied (May 2016) that service tax payment was being made to Sri SaiNath Associates as the firm was providing manpower services and had discontinued payment of service tax on the bills of service providers pertaining to Sanitation & Security. 23. IIM Ranchi replied (June/August 2016) that payment of service tax was discontinued from January 2016 and also stated that they have put up claim for refund of service tax already paid.IIT Patna stated (August 2016) thatHon’ble High Court (in CWJC No 16965 Dated 03 March 2016) has upheld the audit observation and directed Commissioner of Service Tax for refund of Service Tax to the concerned tax payers. Accordingly, the IIT Patna has asked to the service providers for refund of Service Tax. 24. ISI Kolkata replied (October 2016/January 2017) that they had stopped the payment of service tax from February 2015 and have lodged (January 2016) a refund claim with the Service Tax Department. MSPI endorsed (November 2016) the views of ISI, Kolkata.
25. In this regard, the Ministry in their background note submitted the following:-
“BBAU has informed that it was not aware about the provision of service tax applicable. IIM Ranchi has informed that the payment was made due to inadequate awareness about relevant notification.
26. The Ministry in their background note stated the following with regard to interpretation of the rules regarding exemption from service tax in their background note:- 16
“The MHRD is of the view that there are two different interpretations of the rules regarding exemption of the educational institutions from paying service tax by the CAG and the service tax authorities. And this has resulted into the dispute between the service tax authorities and the concerned educational institutions.”
27. When asked as to what action was taken by the Ministry, when according to the MHRD, there were two different interpretations of the rules regarding exemption of the educational institution from paying service tax by the CAG and service tax authorities and, the Ministry replied the following:-
“The instructions in this regard are clear and need to be followed by all autonomous bodies. All Bureau Heads in the Department of Higher Education have been asked to obtain a Compliance Report, from the Autonomous Bodies under their control, as per the format.”
III Gujarat Vidyapith
28. Gujarat Vidyapith (GVP) was founded by Mahatma Gandhi on 18 October, 1920 and received the status of a deemed university under the UGC Act on 16 July, 1963. GVP is a public trust registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. The Vice- Chancellor and the Registrar are responsible for the day-to-day administration of the Vidyapith.
29. In this regard, MHRD in their background note submitted the following:- “Gujarat Vidyapith is fully funded by the Government through UGC, however, it is privately managed. Since, it is fully funded by the Government, it is audited by CAG and Government’s rules apply in respect of promotion, reservation, etc.”
30. Audit of GVP was conducted for the period April 2009 to March 2016 during January-February 2015 and June 2016 to ascertain the extent of adherence to rules and regulations relating to appointment, promotion, pay fixation of Teaching and Non- Teaching Staff working in GVP.
A. Non follow up of norms of reservation.
31. As per Audit, Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) issued (July 1997) instructions for implementation of Post Based Reservation (PBR) roster. Further, UGC from time to time had issued instructions to GVP to the follow reservation policy of GoI for the teaching and non-teaching posts and also to fill up the backlog vacancies for SC/ST/OBC/Physically Handicapped (PH) to fulfill the statutory requirement of 17
GoI.Audit noticed that despite instructions of GoI and UGC, GVP had not prepared and filled up posts as per PBR roster during 2009-2016 for teaching and non-teaching staff resulting in less representation of SC, ST and OBC in teaching staff. During 2009-16, representation of SC and ST category in teaching post of Professor was NIL and in the post of Associate Professor, the representation of ST category was NIL. GVP did not fill up the vacant teaching posts earmarked for the reserved category.
32. In this regard, the Ministry in their background note submitted the following:- “Gujarat Vidyapith in their Action Taken Report dated 16th September, 2017 has intimated that the Rosters for teaching and most of the non-teaching posts have been prepared as per the rules now.” 33. In the Action Taken Report and compliance update on the C&AG report no. 12 of 2017, the Vice-Chancellor, GVP submitted the following to the UGC:-
“Please note that GV has already prepared Post Based Reservation Roster register and has given advertisements accordingly.”
B. Irregularities in Appointments and Drawl of pay scales for various posts
34. Based on the information and records furnished to Audit and on test check of records it was observed that certain appointments made for various posts and pay scales given were not as per the UGC Regulations and GoI norms.
Sl. Name of Audit findings Management Reply No. Post 1. Library GVP had made four appointments (February The GVP replied (April 2016) Assistants 2011-June 2012) of Library Assistants through that the proposal for condoning Direct Recruitment and on the date of the age limit for such appointment, the age of these appointed officials employees is being sent to was beyond the maximum prescribed age as per UGC. Recruitment Rules. 2. Reader Dr.Pradeep Acharya was appointed as Reader The GVP accepted (Bio Gas in Bio Gas Research w.e.f 1 November 1993 but (September 2015) the Research) he did not possess Ph.D as required under the observation and intimated UGC Regulations. He had completed his Ph.D in (June 2016) tentative 26 May 2005. Thus, the appointment of differential 8 amount of ` 30.61 Dr.Acharya as Reader w.e.f lakh for the period up to March 1 November 1993 was irregular. 2016. The final action/recovery was yet to be taken by GVP.
8 Based on the due and drawn statement furnished by GVP on the basis of audit observations. 18
3. Reader The One Man Commission9 appointed to inquire The GVP replied (April 2016) (Archival into the irregularities in the administration of that the case of Ms.Binduvasini Science) GVP had observed (March 2006) that Joshi has again been referred Ms.Binduvasini Joshi was not qualified to even to UGC for grant of ex-post be a Lecturer but was appointed as Reader (AS) facto approval. without having the requisite educational The final action/recovery was qualification and teaching experience. Hence, it yet to be taken by GVP. adversely commented on her selection for the post of Reader (Archival Science). GVP had not sought relaxation from the UGC to appoint the candidate as Reader. 4. Assistant Smt. Raxaben Patel was appointed as Library The GVP accepted Librarian Assistant w.e.f27 March 1983 and further (September 2015) the promoted to the post of Assistant Librarian observation and intimated w.e.f1 August 1988 with the condition that the (June 2016) tentative candidate shall have to pass the Masters of differential amount of ` 59.61 Library Science within two years which was the lakh for the period up to March requisite qualification for appointment as 2016. Assistant Librarian. She cleared Master of The final action/recovery was Library in 1990. Hence promotion as Assistant yet to be taken by GVP. Librarian w.e.f 1 August 1988 was irregular as she did not possess required qualification at the time of promotion. Based on the advertisement, Smt. Raxaben Patel was recruited again as Assistant Librarian/Lecturer (teaching post) on 24 October 1996. The appointment details were forwarded (November 1999) to UGC and the Commission stated (January 2002) its inability to accept the proposal on the ground that she did notpossess NET/SLET. On non-acceptance of the proposal by UGC, Smt. Raxaben Patel was reverted to previous held post of Assistant Librarian on which she was appointed on 1 August 1988 vide orders dated 13 June 2007 considering as lien. The appointment of Smt. Raxaben Patel as Assistant Librarian/Lecturer in October 1996 when she did not possess the required qualification was irregular. 5. Head Clerk Shri. Prahlad G Parmar was appointed as a The GVP accepted Junior Clerk cum typist on 3 January 1990 in the (September 2015) the scale of ` 950-1500. Subsequently based on the observation and intimated
9 UGC had appointed One Man Commission to look into the Financial and Administrative irregularities of the Gujarat Vidyapith. 19
Selection Committee decision, he was appointed (June 2016) tentative as Statistical Assistant on 1 December 1997 in differential amount of ` 13.25 the scale of ` 5,000-8,000 as against the lakh for the period up to March prescribed scale of ` 4,500-7,000. Thus, 2016. ShriP.G.Parmar was irregularly given higher The final action/recovery was scale in the post of Statistical Assistant. yet to be taken by GVP. Further, GVP appointed (24 September 2004) him as Head Clerk from 3 January 1990 i.e. from the date of appointment as Junior Clerk with retrospective effect. The appointment to the post of Head Clerk with retrospective effect and consequential benefits of promotions and MACPs given to ShriPrahlad G Parmar were irregular. 6. Cashier ShriJayeshChauhan, Cashier was drawing The GVP accepted higher pay scale than the pay scales as (September 2015) the prescribed by various pay commissions during observation and intimated the period 1 June 2000 and 31 December 2010. (June 2016) tentative The irregular higher pay scale drawn by differential amount of ` 11.56 ShriJayeshChauhan was considered at par with lakh for the period up to March the post of Head Clerk and hence was promoted 2016. to the post of Section Officer (1 January 2011) The final action/recovery was which was also irregular . yet to be taken by GVP. 7. Internal As per UGC instruction (May 1989)pay scale of The GVP accepted Auditor non-teaching staff of the GVP were at par with (September 2015) the the Central Pay Pattern with effect from 1 April, observation and intimated 1989. ShriDineshbhai C. Rana, was appointed (June 2016) tentative as Internal Auditor w.e.f 1July 1997on a higher differential amount of ` 18.92 pay scale than the prescribed pay scale. The lakh for the period up to March higher pay scale drawn for the period from 1 July 2016. 1997 to 13 March 2003 while holding the post of The final action/recovery was Internal Auditor was irregular. yet to be taken by GVP. 8. Secretarial Ministry of Education & Social Welfare, The GVP accepted Services (Department of Education), GoI prescribed (September 2015) the (January 1978) pay scale of Stenographer in observation and intimated GVP as ` 380-700. Further as per UGC (June 2016) tentative instruction (May 1989) non-teaching staff of the differential amount of ` 15.72 GVP are to be brought at par with the Central lakh, ` 16.94 lakh and ` 11.74 Pay Pattern with effect from 1 April, 1989: lakh respectively in respect of ShriSevantibhaiPanchal, Private Secretary, these three officials for the ShriShaileshTrivedi and Ms.Preeti Shah period up to March 2016. Stenographers were drawing higher pay scale The final action/recovery was other than the prescribed pay scale from the yet to be taken by GVP. date of appointment till the date of audit. This further resulted in incorrect drawl of ACP/MACP 20
9. Lecturer Smt. Shashibala Punjabi was appointed as GVP accepted (September lecturer in the PB - 3 ` 15,600-` 39,100 GP 6000 2015) the observation and in GVP on 26 September 2006. She had intimated (June 2016) tentative tendered her resignation (September 2006) as differential amount of ` 50.25 Assistant Professor (Selection Grade) in lakh for the period up to March previous organisation to join the new post at 2016. GVP. The final action/recovery was GVP gave both pay scale and pay protection by yet to be taken by GVP. fixing the pay in the Pay Band PB 4 ` 34,700- ` 57,000 GP 9,000 w.e.f 26 September 2006 which she was drawing in her previous organisation instead of fixing the pay in the scale of Lecturer of PB - 3 of ` 15,600-` 39,100 with GP 6000 the scale of her appointment. Since her application for appointment as Lecturer in GVP was not routed through proper channel she was not eligible for protection of pay in terms of MoF OM No. 3379-E.III(B)/65 dated 17June, 1965 read with provisions of FR 22-B. Hence she was not eligible for protection of pay and should have been placed in the scale which she was appointed i.e. as Lecturer PB-3 of ` 15,600- ` 39,100 with GP 6,000.
35. With regard to the performance of GVP, the Vice-Chancellor in his oral submission before the Committee stated the following :-
“Meanwhile, I would like to inform all the hon. Members of the Committee that Gujarat Vidyapith has undergone the accreditation process. We have got ‘A’ Grade by the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC). Then, there was a five year review committee by UGC. There we have also got very positive report as well as recommendations and suggestions pertaining to 2020 when Gujarat Vidyapith is completing 100 years of its establishment.”
36. MHRD was asked to intimate the action taken for recovery in respect of appointments made to the post of Asst. Librarian, Head Clerk, Cashier, Internal Auditor, Secretarial Services staff and Lecturer. The Ministry submitted the following:- “The Gujarat Vidyapith has intimated that the matter of adjustment/recovery of the excess amount and taking administrative actions shall be done after approval of the Finance Committee followed by Board of Management, to be held during this month. Gujarat Vidyapith has been directed vide our letter No.5-5/2016 dated 31.10.2017 to effect recovery in each case and report compliance to UGC by 30.11.2017. In addition, UGC will also reduce grants to the extent of recoverable amount form the next grants.” 21
37. When asked about the findings of the high level review committee formed to review all the cases from the angle of legal, administrative and other points, the Ministry submitted the following in their written replies:-
“The Gujarat Vidyapith proposes to terminate the services of the employee who were not eligible as per the recruitment rules with the approval of their Board, the meeting for which is scheduled this month. Gujarat Vidyapith constituted a Review Committee (RC) to look into the cases objected by the Audit and to recommend the action for rectifying them. The Review Committee’s Report was subsequently discussed in the Executive Committee Meeting of Gujarat Vidyapith. The concerned employees were issued show cause notices. Subsequently, after receiving and reviewing the replies given by the incumbents, the Chairperson of the Review Committee was again asked to verify the details of the concerned employees separately in August 2016. The Appellate Authority (Vice Chancellor) had a discussion with the Chairperson of the Review Committee, later on, to discuss the issues raised by the concerned employees. For adhering to the Principle of Natural Justice, a High Level Committee (HLC) was formed on 29/04/2016, which included, Senior Advocate, High Court of Gujarat, Former Senior AO of Office of the AG, Ahmedabad and Former Deputy Director, Gandhi Heritage Site Mission, Ministry of Culture, Government of India, New Delhi, with the intention to confirm the line of action to be taken in these cases. All the three members have given independent Report in individual cases. In the meanwhile, the Vice Chancellor and Registrar were called for discussions for the PAC Meeting, for oral examination on 27th September, 2017. There was a pre and post PAC Meeting Discussion with the Officials of the UGC/MHRD, at Delhi, during which all the cases were further discussed. Finally, Appellate Authority heard the incumbents in person on 5th October, 2017.”
38. On being asked if the internal audit of GVP ever pointed out the irregularities in the appointments, the Ministry stated the following in their written replies:- “The Gujarat Vidyapith has stated that as per the Internal Control Systems in vogue, Gujarat Vidyapith has appointed a firm of Chartered Accountants for carrying out the Audit of all the Financial Transactions / payments; and, whereas the Internal Audit Section has been entrusted with only pre-audit of the payment vouchers. However, this work is internally looked after in hierarchy from Clerks to Deputy Registrar-Administration, before approvals by Competent Authorities. Gujarat Vidyapith is seriously contemplating to get the Administrative Audit of previous appointments/payments to the employees at a stretch and also conduct Administrative Audit subsequently, every year, in future. As per the Rule 236 (2) of General Financial Rules,2017, the accounts of the Grantee Institution or Organization shall be audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India under Section 14 of the Comptroller and Auditor General 22
of India (Duties, Powers and Conditions of Service) Act, 1971, if the Grants or loans to the institution in a financial year are not less than Rupees twenty five lakh and also not less than seventy-five percent of the total expenditure of the Institution. The accounts may also be audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India if the Grants or loans in a financial year are not less than Rupees one crore. Where the accounts are so audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India in a financial year, he shall continue to audit the accounts for a further period of two years notwithstanding that the conditions outlined above are not fulfilled. In terms of provisions contained in General Financial Rules, Gujarat Vidyapith will request C&AG of India to conduct audit of Vidyapith on regular periodicity.”
39. In this context, when asked What action had been taken against those responsible for making such appointments, MHRD replied the following:- “The Gujarat Vidyapith has stated that as the decision of appointment was made by the Members of the duly constituted Selection Committee, it is felt that no individual was responsible for the appointments. This is not acceptable. Gujarat Vidyapith has been directed to identify officials responsible for making such irregular recommendations/selection and take appropriate administrative action against them. UGC will give the compliance report in this regard.”
40. When asked what action had been contemplated against those responsible for making such appointments, whether the Gujarat Vidyapith authorities were aware of the rules/regulations and prescribed qualifications for a post and what action the UGC/ Ministry of HRD had taken against the authorities/VC for violation of law/ favoritism, MHRD submitted the following:- “On the directions of M/HRD, UGC constituted a Committee to look into these affairs. Based on their report, Gujarat Vidyapith has been directed vide our letter No.5-5/2016 dated 31.10.2017 to take immediate corrective action including administrative action against the erring officials. Apart from that, the Ministry has asked the UGC to direct the Institute to terminate all illegal appointments. UGC will also recover the money spent on payment of salary to these illegal appointments by reducing future grants to Gujarat Vidyapith from next year.”
23
Part-II
Observations/Recommendations of the Committee
1. The C&AG of India in their Report no. 12 of 2017 Compliance Audit Union Government (Civil) brought out certain observations related to the Ministry of Human Resource Development. The Committee examined three Audit Paras viz. 13.3, 13.7 and 13.11 of the said report pertaining to “Irregular Expenditure on Project Kendriya Vidyalayas”, “Irregular payment of Service Tax” and “Gujarat Vidyapith”. According to Audit, in para 13.3, KVS incurred expenditure on the Project ‘Kendriya Vidyalayas’ (KVs) in violation of prescribed conditions and as on 31 March 2016, `59.67 crore were due from 81 Project KVs of which 34 had been closed, rendering the possibility of recovery as remote. As per para 13.7, Four institutes under the Ministry of Human Resource Development (Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee; Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, Indian Institute of Management, Ranchi and Indian Institute of Technology, Patna) and one institute under the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata) made payment of service tax amounting to `12.42 crore on the outsourced services, although these services were exempted from payment of such tax. According to Para 13.11, Post Based Rosters as per GoI norms were not being maintained for the teaching and the non-teaching staff and appointments in teaching and non-teaching posts were made in contravention of UGC/GoI instructions which resulted in overpayment of `2.29 crore. The observations/ recommendations of the Committee on important issues are contained in the succeeding paragraphs.
KVS-Recovery of dues
2. The Committee note that Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS), an autonomous body under Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) establishes and manages Kendriya Vidyalayas (KV) and that this scheme of KV had also been extended to the children of the employees of Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs)/Institute of Higher Learning (IHL) owned by Government of India (GoI), at their request (i.e. PSU and IHL), on the condition that all recurring and non- recurring expenditure on running these Vidyalayas would be provided by the 24 sponsoring agencies. The sponsoring authorities of some existing/functioning and closed Project Vidyalayas defaulted in payment of dues resulting in recoverable amount of `24.57 crore in the year 2003. The Committee further note that where the sponsoring authority defaulted in making the required payments, KVS diverted the Government grants to meet the expenditure towards pay & allowance of the staff and other recurring and non-recurring expenditure. The Committee are disappointed to note that Despite C&AG’s Audit Report No. 4 of 2004 and subsequently the Committee’s 46th Report in 2006-07 recommending that the matter may be resolved early by MHRD in coordination with other Departments of GOI with a view to recover the amount due to KVS, the recoverable amount increased to `58.60 crore as on 30.09.2018. The Committee are of the opinion that along with the key concern of recovery of dues which have been long pending, the matter needs to be looked at in the larger perspective of the importance of Project Kendriya Vidyalayas in providing education to children of PSU employees apart from transferable employees of the Government of India as well as floating population and others including those living in remote and undeveloped locations of the country. The Committee feel that there are certain inter-linked issues such as amending the provisions of MoU entered into by KVS with the Project Authorities, running of KVs in the event of request for closure/closure by Project Authorities etc. which also need to be addressed to prevent further instances of default by project authorities. Accordingly, while acknowledging the various steps taken by MHRD to recover the amount due such as meeting the representatives of various ministries whose PSUs sponsored KVs, discussion with the Regional Offices, interaction at personal level by officials of KVS with the concerned Project Authority etc., the Committee recommend that for those Project KVs, functioning and closed, with whom KVS does/did not have an Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the Administrative Ministry of the Project Authority may be asked by the MHRD to either pay the amount due to KVS or the sponsoring authority may be asked to transfer the infrastructural assets where the KV is/was running i.e. the land, the building and all the property contained therein to allow KVS to run the school in the larger interest so that KVS does not have to spend large amount of money on the same. Further, those sponsoring authorities that the KVS has an MOU with, while the KVS/MHRD may in the first instance pursue the steps outlined above, if 25 the same do not yield any result, Clause 14 of the MOU which provides for referring the matter to an arbitrator may be resorted to.
MoU Provisions
3. The Committee note that KVS placed the matter of default by some project sponsoring authorities in payment of KVS dues before the Board of Governors (BOG), KVS in its 77th meeting held on 20.06.2007. BOG, KVS decided signing of MOU with the Sponsoring project Authorities for Kendriya Vidyalayas under project sector and the same is being signed in respect of all new project sector KVs opened after 2007. The Committee also note that the BOG, KVS in its 79th meeting on 26.06.2008, approved the inclusion of a clause “The concerned Ministry, through its Secretary shall also convey their concurrence to the MOU through a separate letter” and that KVS is taking the concurrence in all cases before opening of new Project Sector KVs since then. The Committee are of the view that it is imperative to amend/add provisions in MoUs of KVS with Project Authorities to strengthen KVS in case of default by the latter. The Committee recommend that the MHRD/KVS may consider adding a clause in the MOU to provide for transfer of infrastructural assets to the KVS in case of repeated non- payment of dues to KVS or closure of KV by Project Authority. Further, while noting that KVS has drawn certain amendments/parameters in the existing norms prescribed for opening of new Project KVS such as a tripartite MOU involving the concerned Administrative Ministry which would stand as a financial guarantor to make payment of dues to KVS in the event of default by the Project Authorities for approval by the BOG, the Committee desire that the same may be done at the earliest and would like to be apprised of the status in this regard.
The Committee note that KVS has emphasized on the issue of opening of escrow account by the Project Authorities who have opened Project KVs after the decision of BOG, KVS dated 20.06.2007 and that the Regional Offices have been directed to look into the issue of opening of the same to ensure compliance immediately. The Committee are surprised that the compliance of the said provision was not monitored by KVS earlier and enjoin upon the KVS to ensure opening of the escrow accounts by all Project KVs and also apprise the 26
Committee of the status thereof. The Committee further urge the MHRD/KVS to direct the existing Project KVs to also open the said accounts.
Project Kendriya Vidyalayas in the event of closure
4. The Committee note that as on 30.09.2018, the amount recoverable from 34 closed KVs stood at ` 15.03 crore and that in certain cases there has been no payment during the last 10 years. The Committee note that on closure of any Project KV, assets are retained by Project Authorities. The Committee also observe that the sponsoring authorities of 4 Project Sector Kendriya Vidyalayas have expressed their inability to operate the KVs. Since there has been almost zero progress in recovery of amount due from the closed KVs, the Committee desire that as recommended earlier, the MHRD/KVS may ask the sponsoring authority to transfer the infrastructural assets to KVS to run the school after assessing the demand in the area. The Committee further desire that State Governments and/or other Corporate entities in the area may be requested to contribute towards running of such schools under their Corporate Social Responsibility initiative. The wards of the new sponsoring authorities may be given priority in admissions along with the resident children in the area. The Committee also desire that in the event that it becomes absolutely unviable to run these project schools, the MHRD/KVS may first consider taking over such schools urgently.
Differential Fee structure in Project KVs
5. The Committee note that the KVS has authorized project authorities to prescribe/charge a differential fee structure vis-à-vis civil sector KVs to enable them to generate additional resources for meeting their liabilities towards KVS. The Committee are of the opinion that this goes against the principle of parity and would not be fair for children of local inhabitants studying in the school who would be paying higher fees solely for the purpose of meeting the liability towards KVS by the Project Authority and recommend that while KVS as a whole may revise its fee structure, differential fees may be permitted only after adequate justification.
Status of vacancies in KVs 27
6. The Committee note that the number of vacant posts in KVS stood at 11585 as on 01.08.2017. The Committee while observing that the direct recruitment process for 6205 posts has been completed and recruitment for another 6000 vacancies through Limited Departmental Examination has been assigned to CBSE by KVS, recommend that the sanctioned posts in all the schools under the KVS may be filled at the earliest. The Committee desire to be apprised of the status thereof.
Irregular payment of Service Tax
7. The Committee note that Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), Government of India exempted certain services provided to or by educational institutions from service tax w.e.f. 1 July 2012 vide notification which clarified that exempted services inter-alia include any service which educational institutions ordinarily carry out themselves but may obtain as outsourced services from any other person. It was further clarified that by virtue of the entry in the negative list, it was clear that all services relating to education are exempt from service tax including hostels, construction, housekeeping, security services, canteen etc. The Committee observe that four institutes under the Ministry of Human Resource Development viz. Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Roorkee, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University (BBAU), Lucknow, Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Ranchi, and IIT, Patna irregularly paid almost ` 11. 85 crore as service tax for services provided by contractors towards rendering of services of security, construction, housekeeping and catering etc. The Committee are dismayed to note that most of the institutes have pleaded lack of awareness of the provision of service tax applicable as the reason for payment of the same. The Committee are alarmed at the confusing responses from the MHRD who have stated at one point that there are two different interpretations of the rules regarding exemption of educational institutes from paying service tax and at another that the instructions are clear and need to be followed by autonomous bodies. It is essential for the nodal ministry to be clear on the prescribed rules and regulations in order to disseminate correct information to the organizations under them. The Committee recommend that a cell may be setup in the Ministry which may coordinate with the Ministry of Finance and organizations under the Ministry for seeking such tax related clarifications. The Committee also recommend that the MHRD issue necessary instructions to all the organizations 28 under them to appoint a nodal officer, who may interact on behalf of the organization and seek clarifications from the above-mentioned cell on tax related issues.
Gujarat Vidyapith (GVP) - Non-follow up of norms of reservation
8. The Committee observe that despite instructions of Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Government of India (GoI) and University Grants Commission (UGC), Audit found that GVP had not prepared and filled up posts as per Post Based Reservation (PBR) roster during 2009-2016 for teaching and non- teaching staff resulting in less than prescribed representation of SC, ST and OBC in teaching staff. The Committee note that after being pointed by Audit, GVP has since prepared PBR roster and has given advertisements for filling up the posts. The Committee would like to be apprised of the status thereof in all cadres in GVP. The Committee desire that the PBR should be regularly prepared and the recruitment process may be initiated well in advance to ensure that the vacancies are filled up at the earliest.
Monitoring by Ministry and UGC
9. The Committee note that in respect of both the issues of non- preparation and filling up of posts as per Post Based Reservation (PBR) roster and irregularities in appointments and pay scales given for various posts, on the directions of MHRD, UGC constituted a Committee to look into these affairs. Based on its report, Gujarat Vidyapith was directed to take immediate corrective action including administrative action against the erring officials. The Committee observe that the Ministry has asked the UGC to direct the Institute to terminate all illegal appointments. The Committee observe that UGC will recover the money spent on payment of salary to these illegal appointments by reducing future grants to Gujarat Vidyapith from next year. In this regard, the Committee are of the opinion that if a strong system of internal audit had been in place, irregularities of such kind would not have taken place. While acknowledging the steps taken by MHRD/GVP to strengthen the internal audit system, the Committee still feel that the MHRD needs to develop a mechanism to monitor all institutes 29 under its aegis on a regular basis so that such instances do not recur.
10. The Committee note that test check of records by Audit revealed that certain appointments made for various posts viz. Library Assistants, Reader (Bio Gas Research), Reader (Archival Science), Library Assistant, Head Clerk, Cashier, Internal Auditor, Secretarial Services, Lecturer etc. and pay scales given were not as per the UGC Regulations and GoI norms. The Committee are shocked to find that in the appointments of teaching and non-teaching staff, deviations from the requirement of prescribed qualifications, age criteria etc. under the UGC guidelines and GoI norms were made and that there was retrospective selection in the higher post, grant of higher pay scales and fixation of higher pay in contravention of UGC guidelines/regulations. The Committee note that the Gujarat Vidyapith constituted a Review Committee (RC) to look into the cases objected by the Audit and to recommend corrective action. The Committee observe that GVP issued orders for discontinuation of services of certain posts and recoveries in respect of those given higher scales. While recoveries in some cases has been started, in some, the employees concerned have filed special civil applications in the High Court of Gujarat and in one case, final directions from UGC are pending. The Committee recommend that GVP may take the necessary steps to ensure timely recoveries in all the cases. The Committee also recommend that applications may be filed in the Court for speedy hearing of cases that are subjudice so that the matters are not prolonged unendingly and reach their logical conclusion at the earliest.
Grading and Review
11. The Committee are shocked to note that the GVP was awarded ‘A’ Grade by the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) and that a five year review committee also gave a positive report to the Institute despite the occurrence of several irregularities in the internal affairs of the Institute. This casts a shadow on the accreditation process of NAAC and UGC. The Committee find it pertinent to mention here that any accreditation which is authorized by the MHRD holds immense value for all the students and their parents while looking for admission in Institutes/ universities, and it is imperative that such an accreditation may be done after stringent assessment of the performance of any 30 institute. The Committee recommend that a review of all the organizations accredited by NAAC/UGC may be carried out to verify that there functioning, appointments and all other aspects are in order. The Committee further recommend that the accreditation should only be valid for a prescribed period and renewal of the same may also be done after thorough review of the functioning to ensure conformity with all the extant rules and regulations.
Report of Committee of External Experts
12. The Committee note GVP’s submission that all the cases are very old and require in-depth study of all the papers/records related to the appointments to identify the officials, if any, responsible for the irregularities made in these cases. GVP has appointed a Committee of External Experts to look into these aspects, to fix the responsibility. The Committee has been asked to submit report in respect of each appointment, by 30th November, 2018. The Committee desire to be apprised of the findings of the committee and the action taken thereon. The Committee further desire that in case collusion and malafide action is established, penal action may be taken against the officials involved in the matter.
NEW DELHI; Mallikarjun Kharge 13 December, 2018 Chairperson 22 Agrahayana, 1940 (Saka) Public Accounts Committee