1

NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
ZONAL AUDIT PARTY, S.P. ZONE

No.F.______/IAD/ZAP/SPZ/2014/______ Dated_____________

Subject: Physical verification & test check audit on account of Building Department,
S.P.Zone, for the period 09.8.2013 to 10.9.2014.

Please find enclosed herewith the Audit Inspection Report on account of Building Department, S. P.
Zone for the period 09.8.2013 to 10.9.2014. Para wise replies/comments be sent to the office of the
undersigned within a period of the four weeks of the receipts.

Internal Audit Officer

ZAP/S.P.Zone

EE (Building)
S.P.Zone

Copy to :
1 SE(Building) S.P.Zone, for information pl.
2 D.C.A.(I.A.D.) for information pl.
3 Office Copy.

Internal Audit Officer

ZAP/S.P.Zone

1
 2

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
ZONAL AUDIT PARTY, S.P. ZONE

No.F____/IAD/ZAP/SPZ/2014/_____ Dated_______

Subject: Physical verification & test check audit on account of Building Department,
S.P.Zone, for the period 09.8.2013 to 10.9.2014.

INTRODUCTION:

As per approved programme the physical verification and test audit on account of Building
Department, SP Zone, for the period 09.8.2013 to 10.9.2014 was conducted by the Zonal Audit Party,
S.P.Zone , during the period 11.9.2014 to 30.9.2014 . The Audit Party consisting of the following staff
working under the control and supervision of Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, Internal Audit Officer, S.P.Zone
conducted the audit of the said office.

1 Sh. Pradeep Singh Rawat Accountant

2 Sh.Subhash Mishra Acctt. Asstt.
3 Sh. Satish Sharma UDC

Sh. S.R. Meena was holding the post of EE (Building) at the time of audit.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The main aim of the Building Department is to sanction building plans as per norm prescribed in the building by
laws, to take demolition action against the unauthorized constructions and to seal the properties violating the provisions o
Delhi Master etc etc.

HOD/H.O.S/D.D.O’s/CASHIERS

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

S. No. HOD Head of Office DDO Cashier

S/Shri S/Shri/Ms. S/Shri/Ms. S/Shri/Ms.
1. Sh. Anil Prakash Sh.S R Meena Sh.S R Meena ------
E-in-C EE(Bldg.) EE(Bldg.)

Budget Allocation and Expenditure for the year

Budget Year Expenditure up to Excess/Saving

year ending
Mentioned in the
Report

Statutory Audit:-

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

Vacancy Statement:

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

Sanctioned
1. Group A 01 01 nil
2. Group B 04 04 nil
3. Group C 15 09 06
4. Group D 11 02 09
2
 3

Total: 31 16 15

Maintenance of Records:-

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

Old Audit Report

There were Nil audit para’s outstanding the department has made compliance of as such Nil para’s settled. The remaining
Nil Para’s have been incorporated with current audit report as part-I (old audit report).

(A)
S. No. Year Total Para’sPara Settled Para no. of Outstanding
Settled Para paras with Para
No.
1. 1969-70 12 --- --- 12
2. 1970-75 14 --- --- 14
3. 1975-79 10 --- --- 10
4. 1979-84 11 --- --- 11
5. 1984-87 11 --- --- 11
6. 1987-88 11 --- --- 11
7. 1989-90 11 --- --- 11
8. 1990-91 10 --- --- 10
9. 1991-93 08 --- --- 08
10. 1992-93 05 --- --- 05
11. 1993-94 05 --- --- 05
12. 1995-96 06 --- --- 06
13. 1995-96 08 --- --- 08
14. 1996-97 07 --- --- 07
15. 1997-98 06 --- --- 06
16. 1998-99 06 --- --- 06
17. 1999-00 07 --- --- 07
18. 2000-01 05 --- --- 05
19. 2001-02 07 --- --- 07
20. 2002-03 10 --- --- 10
21. 2003-04 10 --- --- 10
22. 2004-05 08 --- --- 08
23. 2005-06 16 --- --- 16
24. 2006-10 23 --- --- 23
25. 2010-11 17 --- --- 17
26. 2011-12 18 --- --- 18
27. 2012-13 13 --- --- 13
Total 275 --- --- 275

(B) Details of Old Recovery

S. No. Year Total old Recovery Amount Recovered Balance

In Rs. Recovery against
Paras (Amount in
Rs. Para wise)
1. 1969-70 --- ---
2. 1970-75 Rs. 56683.58 --- Rs. 56683.58
3. 1975-79 --- ---
4. 1979-84 --- ---
5. 1984-87 --- ---
6. 1987-88 Rs.2312439.23 --- Rs.2312439.23
7. 1989-90 Rs.1700.00 --- Rs.1700.00
3
 4

8. 1990-91 Rs.3638.00 --- Rs.3638.00

9. 1991-93 Rs.59785.00 --- Rs.59785.00
10. 1992-93 --- ---
11. 1993-94 Rs.101656.80 --- Rs.101656.80
12. 1995-96 Rs.17727.00 --- Rs.17727.00
13. 1995-96 Rs.36750.00 --- Rs.36750.00
14. 1996-97 Rs.47800.00 --- Rs.47800.00
15. 1997-98 Rs.74263.00 --- Rs.74263.00
16. 1998-99 Rs.115200.00 --- Rs.115200.00
17. 1999-00 Rs.187237.00 --- Rs.187237.00
18. 2000-01 --- ---
19. 2001-02 --- ---
20. 2002-03 --- ---
21. 2003-04 --- ---
22. 2004-05 Rs.606575.00 --- Rs.606575.00
23. 2005-06 Rs.1106402.00 --- Rs.1106402.00
24. 2006-10 Rs.6639742.40 --- Rs.6639742.40
25. 2010-11 Rs.1611511.00 --- Rs.1611511.00
26. 2011-12 Rs.3505555.00 --- Rs.3505555.00
27 2012-13 Rs.2846324.00 --- Rs.2846324.00
Total Rs.19330989.01 --- Rs.19330989.01

Current Audit Report

Details of Current Recovery (Audit Period 09.8.2013 to 30.9.2014.):-

Para No.’s Total Recoveries (in Rs.) Amount Recovered Balance (in Rs.)
06 21,59,309/- nil 21 59,309/-
07 21,383/- nil 21,383/-

Total: Rs.21,80,692/- /-

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

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

PART-II (CURRENT AUDIT)

The following records were requisitioned for audit/scrutiny on test check basis vide this office
memo no. IAD/ZAP/SPZ/2014/01, dated 11.9.2014.

1. Property Register
2. Imprest Register
3. ECR/ Service Books/Personal Files
4. Cash Book
5. Cheque Register
6. Temporary Advance Register
7. Missal Band Register
8. Notice Book/ u/c Register
9. O.T.A. Records
10. Complaint Register
11. Daily Diary of staff
12. G-8 books/Challans
13. C.C. File/ Register
14. Demolition charge Register
15. Log Book of vehicles with sanction file
16. Stationery Register
17. G-8 Book Stock Register
18. Sanction Plan files/Register
4
 5

19. OPR Cheque register

20. Stay Order Register
21. Sealing Register
22. Circular file/office order file
23. U/C programme file
24. Budget watch Register
25. Chit Challan
26. Stitching charges Register
27. EC/BC Register
28. Demolition Register
29. Attendance Register
30. Postage Register
31. Record of Conversion charges
32. Record of Parking charges
33. Uniform Register
34. Court cases Register
35. Development Charges Register
36. Disburshment Register
37. T&P Register
38. Diary/Dispatch Register
39.Record pertaining to regularization of unauthorized construction
40. Book FIR pertaining to concerned JE
41. Book of show Cause Notice
42. Book of Demolition order pertaining to respective area of JE
43. Information/list regarding nos. of hotel/restaurants/guest houses constructed in accordance with the
sanctioned bldg. Plan and no. of such unauthorized buildings with action taken therein.
44. Stock book of show cause notice books, challans etc.
45. Conversion charges records.
46. Any other auditable record.

PARA NO. 1: NON ISSUANCE OF ORIGINAL G-8 RECIEPTS TO THE INDIVIDUAL

CONCERNED:

On going through the checking of the G-8 Books so provided by the department it come to the notice of
audit that following mentioned 09 numbers of G-8 receipts were not issued to the individual concerned by
the department and remain in the G-8 Books.

S.NO. G-8 RECEIPT NO. & DATE AMOUNT

1. BH 085547 DATED 28.3.2014 RS. 1,244/-
2. BH 085548 DATED 28.3.2014 RS. 4,147/-
3. BH 085583 DATED 02.4.2014 RS. 7,680/-
4. BH 085590 DATED 02.4.2014 RS. 3,110/-
5. BH 085815 DATED 08.5.2014 RS. 1,075/-
6. BH 085884 DATED 16.5.2014 RS. 4,707/-
7. BH 085885 DATED 16.5.2014 RS. 4,707/-
8. BH 085886 DATED 16.5.2014 RS. 10,944/-
9. BH 085887 DATED 16.5.2014 RS. 10,944/-

Non issuance of G-8 receipts to the concerned individual on a/c of receipt of payment is lapse on the part
of officer/ In-charge concerned and it may lead legal litigations in future. An audit memo vide no.
IAD/ZAP/SPZ/2014/03 dated 12.9.2014 issued to the department to clarify the reason for non issuance
of the said receipts to its concerned and for issue of these receipts immediately under intimation to
audit but no reply has been made by the department till date.

PARA NO. 2: IRREGULARITIES/ DISCREPANCEIS NOTICED IN G-8 BOOKS.

The following G-8 Books were provided by the Bldg. Department/SP Zone to the audit party for checking/
scrutiny:
BH 085201 to 300, 085391 to 400, 085401 to 500, 085601 to 700, 085701 to 800, 085801 to 900 and
085901 to 086000 (out of which G-8 receipts no. 085391, 085858 were shown cancelled).
BJ 086801 to 900, 086901 to 087000, 087001 to 100, 087301 to 400, 087401 to 500, 087101 to 200, 087501
to 600, 087201 to 300, 087601 to 700 and 087701 to 800 ( out of which G-8 receipt no. 086987 was shown
cancelled).
CD 58001 to 58100 and 58202 to 300.

5
 6

On checking/ scrutiny of above said G-8 Books with challan the following irregularities/ discrepancies
were noticed by audit;

1. Challan for the G-8 receipt no. BH 085235 dated 25.11.2013, 085253 dated 07.3.2014 and 085254
dated 10.3.2014 were not available in the challan file.
2. In some of the cases the stamp of cashier were not available on the back of G-8 receipts at the time of
receiving the amount.
3. In most of the all G-8 receipts the size of premises for conversion charges were not mentioned and it
could not be ascertained whether the conversion charges has been calculated accordingly or not.
4. In the computerized list of total with challan no. 47 dated 30.6.2014, G-8 receipt no. BJ 087733 dated
28.6.2014 has been shown twice ie for Rs. 2,500/- and Rs. 50/-.
5. G-8 Book no. CD 58001 to 58100 shown in the statement of computerized detail as 59001 to 100 with
challan no. 48 dated 01.7.2014.
6. There were delay in depositing the collection amount the G-8 by the department as detailed below:

G-8 NO & DATE AMOUNT DATE OF DEPOSIT

BH 085301/05.9.2013 Rs. 1,18,507/- 10.9.2013
BH 085327/ 11.10.2013 Rs 4,97,171/- 17.10.2013
BH 085361/16.01.2014 Rs. 13,619/- 20.01.2014

Apart from above said irregularities/ discrepancies it was also observed that department had realized
an amount of Rs. 25,183/- vide G-8 receipt no. 85208 to 85211 dated 12.9.2013 and deposited the
same in to Mpl. Treasury vide challan no. 48-A dated 13.9.2013 in which it has been mentioned that
the collection were from the G-8no. 85208 to 85211. But G-8 no. 85211 dated 12.9.2013 amounting
Rs. 14,000/- was shown cancelled by the department on its original receipt ( IInd copy was not
available in the G-8 Book). It was not clear to audit how the department had deposited the amount of
said cancelled G-8 receipt of amounting Rs. 14,000/-

An audit memo vide no. IAD/ZAP/SPZ/2014/08 dated 22.9.2014 issued to the department to clarify
the reason in this regard but no reply has been made by the department till date.

PARA NO3.- IRREGULARITIES NOTICED IN POSTAGE REGISTER:

Postage register is maintained to record the expenditure incurred on various items of expenditure in the
nature of contingent expenditure. It should be maintained in the prescribed standard form to enable to keep
watch over the progressive expenditure under a particular head. During the course of audit of the Building
Department the following irregularities were noticed in the maintenance of Postage Register.
1. Postage Register was not paged numbered and certificate to the effect that the register contains page 1
to______ was not given and initialed by the official maintaining it and by any superior.
2. Postage register was in bad(torn) condition and need its binding immediately.
3. No sanction of Postage charges were mentioned in the register.
4. No periodic/ supervisory check was found in the register.
5. It was not maintained in the prescribed standard form, the complete detail of expenditure such as date ,
description of expenditure i.e. sanction / approval of the authority etc. was not found.
6. The wrong serial no. 1224 and 1537 mentioned in the register instead of s.no. 1424 and 1437
respectively, but the same was not corrected / signed by the authority competent.
7. The recoupment of expenditure made on a/c of postage charges amounting Rs. 1700/-(approx) from
s.no. 423 dated 07.11.2013 to 1590 dated 02.9.2014 was not shown in the register, needs clarification.
The concerned official may clarify the source of money for such expenditure without recoupment.
8. The controlling authority is required to exercise check over the maintenance of Postage register and
should satisfy himself that the register is being maintained properly, the charges were necessary and not
accessing and sanction obtained was adequate. The above mentioned exercise was not found done by the
concerned authority.
9. Entries made in the register were not initialed by the official maintaining it and also by any superior
authority.

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

6
 7

PARA NO4. NON ACTION TAKEN ON THE CASES IN WHICH SHOW CAUSE NOTICE AND
DEMOLITION NOTICE ISSUED.

Misal Band Register was produced w.e.f.09.8.2013 onwards. The register was not page numbered
and also no paging certificate was given. According to this register the following mentioned cases after
issue of show cause notice and demolition notice there was no mention about the action taken by the
deptt with regard demolition, sealing etc.

S.No. of FIR No. SCN No. Demolition notice Demolition order

register
282 6209/23.8.13 32254/23.8.13 12908/11.9.13 ---
283 6210/23.8.13 32255/23.8.13 ---------- ---
285 6212/23.8.13 32257/23.8.13 12912/11.9.13 ---
286 621323.8.13 32258/23.8.13 12909/11.9.13 ---
287 6215/23.8.13 32259/23.8.13 --------------- ----
330 6236/30.813 32331/30.8.13 ---------------- ---
332 60873/30.8.13 32278/30.8.13 ---------------- ---
334 6237/09.09.13 32332/09.09.13 12921/18.9.13 ---
336 60876/09.09.13 32281/09.09.13 ---------------- ---
337 60877/09.9.13 32282/09,9,13 12916/18.9.13 ----
339 60879/09.9.13 32284/09.9.13 12915/18.9.13 ----
342 6243/17.9.13 32338/17.9.13 12711/27.9.13 ----
348 6250/17.9.13 32344/17.9.13 ---- ----
352 6254/17.9.13 32348/17.9.13 ---- ----
354 6256/17.9.13 32350/17.9.13 ---- ----
360 6257/18.9.13 32351/18.9.13 ---- ----
361 6258/18.9.13 32352/18.9.13 ---- ----
366 6263/18.9.13 32357/18,9,13 ---- ----
368 6265/18.9.13 32359/18.9.13 ---- ----
379 60881/26.9.13 32286/26.9.13 ---- ----
380 60882/27.9.13 32289/27.9.13 ---- ----
384 6152/10.10.13 32376/10.10.13 12969/25.11.13 ----
385 6153/10,10,13 32377/10.10.13 12970/25.11.13 ----
388 6157/10.10.13 32380/10.10.13 12973/25.11.13 ----
389 6158/10.10.13 32381/10.10.13 12974/25.11.13 ----
390 6159/28,10,13 32382/28.10.13 12719/08.11.13 ----
394 60887/07.11.13 32292/07.9.13 12765/20.11.13 ----
395 60888/07.11.13 32293/07.11.13 12767/22.11.13 ----
405 6403/08.11.13 32403/08.11.13 12978/22.11.13 ----
411 6171/27.11.13 32062/27.11.13 ---- ----
415 6174/28.11.13 32063/28.11.13 ---- ----
416 6175/28.11.13 32064/28.11.13 ---- ----

Reason for non action taken on the above said notices may clarify to audit.

An audit memo vide no. IAD/ZAP/SPZ/2014/05 dated 15.9.2014 issued to the department to clarify
the reason in this regard but no reply has been made by the department till date.

PARA NO.5: NON-MAINTENANCE OF D&C REGTSTER BY THE BLDG. DEPTT. TILL THE DATE
OF AUDIT BEING THE MANDATORY REQUIREMENT:

During the course of audit it was noticed that no forms regarding conversion and parking charges
were submitted by the owners of the property falling within the zonal limit of S.P.Zone and amount were
deposited in the mpl, treasury. These forms are lying in the department unattended i.e. no checking of the
forms has been made i.e whether the amount shown by the owners is correct or not. No D&C Register has
been maintained till date. Without maintaining the D&C Register it is very difficult not only for audit but
even for the department itself to ascertain that how much amount was to be recovered and how much is
recovered. This work was not been taken care of by the deptt resulting loss on a/c of non recovery of
conversion and parking charges from the property owners of the area.

Further the department failed to take enforcement measures with regard to non-payment of said
charges because of non-maintenance of D&C Registers. Even the facts furnished by the owners have not
been verified by the Bldg. Deptt.

7
 8

PARA NO.6- NON-RECOVERY OF DEMOLISHING CHARGES AMOUNTING TO RS.21,59,309/-

W.E.F.09.8.2013 TO JUNE 2014.

During the course of audit, it was noticed that demolishing charges amounting Rs. 21,59,309/- for
the above period, had not been recovered by the department till dated. It is a revenue loss to the
Corporation. Reason for non-recovery of the outstanding demolition charges be clarified to audit and
efforts be made to recover the above mention amount of demolition charges along with the outstanding
amount pointed out in the previous audit reports under intimation to audit. It was also noticed that the
duration of the demolition action and charges per hour was also not mentioned in the register so the exact
amount could be verified by the audit. Hence the deptt may update its record and recover the exact/
accurate amount of demolition charges as per rule. The record whatever is maintained contains no
complete updated time and figures of demolition charges that also needs updating of the record. It cannot
be denied that a considerable period has been lapsed while MCD is in the need of funds.

An audit memo vide no. 11/IAD/SPZ/ZAP/2014 dated 24.9.2014 issued to department

with the request to pass necessary instruction to their staff and accellarate the efforts to
recover the above said amount immediately by taking legal action against the defaulters under
intimation to audit but no action taken/ reply from the department has been made till date.

PARA NO. 7: IMPROPER MAINTENANCE OF REGULARISATION FILE REGISTER.

On going through the audit of Regularization file register maintained by the department, the
following observations were noticed by audit:
1. Register so produced starts from 13.4.2010 to 17.9.2014.
2. File pertaining at s.no. 01 and 02, only the last movement was shown and no further
movement of the file was shown so it was not possible to ascertain that where the file stand at
present or what action has been taken as a long period elapsed, needs clarification.
3. At s. no. 03 (R/07/EE(B)/SPZ dated 16.4.2010 the last movement shown ALO/SPZ dated
16.6.2010 and stand pending on their part.
4. At s.no. R/21EE(B)/SPZ dated 10.5.2010 last movement of file shown to Sh. S.L.Meena dated
28.9.2010 and no further movement till date of the file, needs clarification. Similarly the
status/movement of the files entered at s.no. 92 to 105, 107 to 117, 119 to 133 and 135 to
149 were not mentioned/available in the register.
5. At s. no. 8 R/13/EE(B)/SPZ dated 27.4.2010, Smt. Kaushlya Devi Mittal of property no. 11042-
11046 (old no. 8332-36) Multani Dhanda, Pahar Ganj, deposited Rs. 1,38,131 vide DD no.
091515 dated 23.12.2010 and G-8 no. 28499 dated 29.12.2010 but it was not shown whether
her property has been regularized or not in the said register.
6. In some places white fuild has been used by the officials and supervisory check was not done in
the register.
Reason for improper maintenance of the register may clarified to audit.

PARA NO 8: IRREGULARITIES/DISCREPANCIES IN ENGAGING VEHICLE NO. 407 TATA

TRUCK.(RECOVERY OF RS. 21,383/-)

During the course of scrutiny of File regarding engaging CNG truck TATA-407 for day to day work
of Bldg. Department/SPZ, the following irregularities/ discrepancies were noticed by audit:
1. Truck was engaged vide no. EE(M)/SPZ/III/573/2013-14 dated 10.4.2013 for 205 days
@ Rs. 1,283/- per day but department had paid Rs. 1,283/- per day plus cost of CNG
which comes to Rs. 21,383/- paid by the department en excess to contractor on a/c of
cost of CNG.
2. As per noting of Dealing Assistant dated 14.3.2014, the file was forwarded to DC/SPZ for
ex-post facto approval/ sanction for 90 days w.e.f. 07.3.2014 onwards for engaging the
same truck and DC/SPZ forwarded the same to DCA/SPZ for examination on dated
19.3.2014. Truck was engaged without approval/ sanction of DC/SPZ, needs clarification.
3. No NIT/Tender process was taken by the department and no any concurrence obtained
from the ACA/SPZ.
Reason for above said irregularities/ discrepancies be clarified to audit and overpayment made
to contractor amounting Rs. 21,383/- may recovered immediately under intimation to audit.

An audit memo vide no. IAD/ZAP/SPZ/2014/10 dated 30.9.2014 issued to the department to
clarify the reason in this regard but no reply has been made by the department till date.

8
 9

PARA NO.-9: LACK OF CONTROL OVER THE EXPENDITURE AGAINST THE SANCTIONED BUDGET I
2013-14 and 2014-15 :

During the test audit of the Budget Watch Register for the year 2013-14 and 2014-15, the following
irregularities were noticed:

In the cases shown below, the department has incurred excess/less expenditure than the
allocation:

2013-14

S.No. Head of account Total Allocation Expenditure Difference

(Rs.) (Rs.)
1 85/1001 6,00,000/- 2,12,388/- (-)3,87,612/-
2 85/1002 10,00,000- 25,52,053/- (+)15,52,053/-
3 85/1003 25,00,000- 19,89,308/- (-)5,10,692/-
4 85/1004 4,00,000- 7,02,189/- (+)3,02,189/-
5 85/1193 25,000/- 14,530/- (-)10,470/-
6 85/1156 5,000/- ----------- (-)5,000/-
7 85/1119 30,000- 28,318/- (-)1,682/-
8 85-1232 5,00,000/- 4,94,872/- (-)5,128/-

2014-15

S.No. Head of account Total Allocation Expenditure Difference

(Rs.) Upto Oct-14
1 85/1001 6,00,000/- 11,98,328/-
2 85/1002 10,00,000- 11,57,793/-
3 85/1003 25,00,000- 14,00,470/-
4 85/1004 4,00,000- 3,46,451/-
5 85/1193 20,000/- 5,761/-
6 85/1156 7,000/- 4,917/-
7 85/1119 30,000- 18.655/-
8 85-1232 5,00,000/- 2,85,800/-

DDO is responsible for the control of expenditure against the sanctioned budget placed at his
disposal. No expenditure should be incurred during the financial year on any work/item not covered
by the budget grant. If any excess over the allocation of budget is apprehended, the deptt. should
obtain additional allocation before incurring the excess expenditure. Similarly all the anticipated
savings should be surrendered by the prescribed date, before the close of the financial year.

It is clear from the above statement produced by the department that the expenditure under
the salary head1001 the budget allocation were same for the year 2013-14 and 2014-15 but
expenditure made under this head in the year 2013-14 was much less than allocation and much above
in the year 2014-15, there was huge difference in both year. Secondly the budget under salary head
1002 and 1004 was allocated Rs. 10,00,000/- and Rs. 4,00,000/- respectively for the year 2013-14
but expenditure was much above than allocation and the same was not revised for the year 2014-15
accordingly. The same may be clarified to audit that what efforts had made by the department for
allocation of budget according to previous expenditure under it.

From the above, it is revealed that the department has violated the terms of GFR for controlling
the budget allocation & expenditure during the said year, as there is huge difference in allocated
budget and expenditure incurred during the financial year. Savings were not surrendered and
expenditure incurred without getting sanctioned additional budget. Reasons for the above
irregularities be explained to audit.

PARA NO.10- TEST CHECK OF SERVICE BOOKS AND PERSONAL FILES.

During the course of test audit of the service books and personal files, the following irregularities
were noticed in the records produced:

A. PF & SB OF Sh. Raj Kumar Verma, JE(B):

The following irregularities were found in the PF & SB;

(a) Leave account had not been completed;
(b) Personal file was not paged numbered.

9
 10

(c) Increment column was not signed by the EE (B) up to date.

(d) In some places the signature of Acctt. Was not found available in the entries of DA arrears in
the SB.
(e) The following Earned Leave availed by the employee was not debited in the leave account:
E/L 23.6.2010 to 28.6.2010. It is pertinent to mention here that leave credited to the official
upto 31.12.2013 but leave taken w.e.f 11.7.2016 to till date has not been debited in the
leave account while some ot the leave application availed by the official remain in the file.
The same may debited under intimation to audit.

B. PF & SB OF Sh. R.K. Khari AE(B):

(a) Personal file was not paged numbered.
(b) Leave account is incomplete upto date.
(c) No police verification certificate is available in the file.
(d) Leave account of the SB-I found in bad (torn) condition.

C. PF & SB OF SH.Jai Prakash Singh AE(B)

(a)Personal file was not paged numbered.

(b)Leave account is incomplete upto date.
(c) some ot the leave application availed by the official remain in the file. The same may debited
under intimation to audit.

SOME COMMON IRREGULRITIES FOUND IN ALMOST ALL THE PF & SBs:

1. Earned Leave and Half Pay leave account had not been updated in most of the cases.
2. Personal file was not paged numbered .
3. Entries in respect of annual Increment had not been found made in most of the SB’s.
4. Entries of annual increment were not signed by the DDO.
5. In some of the SB the mandatory details of the officials were not given.
6. In some of the PF the photocopies attached were not attested which is mandatory.
7. Entries of drawal of arrears were also not signed by the competent authority.
8. Column no. 08 of SB was also not found initialed by the official concerned.

PARA NO.11:IRREGULARITIES FOUND IN THE SANCTIONED BUILDING FILES:

During the course of test check audit of some Sanctioned/Rejected Bldg. Plan Files, it was observed
that in many cases where the Bldg. Plans were sanctioned, the files were not got examined by the
ALO/SPZ regarding chain of ownership and the files were also not sent to Chief Town Planner for certain
clarification while in other files where the bldg. Plans were rejected, both these authorities were consulted
by the Bldg. Deptt. Following are some of the cases where such irregularities were found:

A. SBP File No.56/B/SPZ/13 dated 11.102013, Sh. Sukhvinder Singh. P no. 906 and 907
Gali Chandni Wali, Patti Main Bazar, Pahar Ganj:

During course of checking of this file, following irregularities were found:-

(a) Photograph in triplicate was not available in the file.

(b) Structural safety certificate issued by structural Engineer and Architect
annexed at page no. 67/c was without its date of issue.
(c) In the lay out plan there were no signature of property owner and the
signature of the Architect was without dated on it.
(d) Date of preparation of lay out plan and Building Plan were not
mentioned.
(e) The column for the Cess amount in the affidavit and space for
measurement found left blank.

B. SBP FILE NO.55/B/SPZ/13 dated 30.9.2013, P.no. 10731, Andha Mughal, Pratap Nagar.

During course of checking of this file, following irregularities were found:-

(a) The observation of Town& Planning Department dated 24.02.2014 regarding to ascertain
whether property falls on any notified streets under mixed use regulation by Bldg. Department
before finalization the case and act as per circular dated 27.5.2009 was not cleared by the
department.
(b) The file was not page numbered.
(c) Photo of the applicant in triplicate were not available in the file.
(d) Most of the certificate/ document submitted by the structural Engineer/Architect found without
dated under their signature.
(e) The column in the Indemnity Bond signed by the applicant/executives found left blank and not
filled up.

10
 11

PARA No.12: IRREGULARITIES FOUND IN THE ECR

The ECR has been produced for the year 2013-14 and 2014-15:
(a) Paging certificate was not given by the competent authority in the beginning of the register.
(b) In some cases, the mandatory columns have not been filled up like allotment of accommodation,
GPF no., pay scale, DOB, DOI, DOR etc and other details like arrear of DA, Bonus etc. were found
blank.
(c) Complete detail of LPC issued in case of the employees who have joined the office on transfer from
the other office was not found mentioned in the ECR.
(d) Similarly there is a need to mention all the details regarding the employees who are transferred
from this deptt. to other departments which was not found in the ECR;
(e) Cuttings/overwriting has been found at many pages of the ECR and in some places the fluid used
in the entries.
(f) The following mentioned JE’s were not being paid salary since their joining the service which is
more than one year period :
Sh. Hannumant Trivedi, Sh. Naveen Kumar, Sh. R. K. Verma, Sh. Abhishek, Sh. Kapil Dev and and
Sh. Jitender Panchal.
Reason for non payment of salary to the above mentioned JE’s be clarified to audit.
(g) No signature of any supervisory officer in the ECR.

PARA NO13.- DEVIATION IN DEMOLITION OF PROPERTIES IN ACTUAL AND IN PROPERTIES

APPROVED/FIXED FOR ACTION/DEMOLITION FROM THE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES-
VARIATION THEREON:

During the course of audit of register of fixing of demolition programme and register of action
taken, deviations were found in action/demolition. In most of the cases, on particular date, the
properties with their booking no., shown mentioned in the register of demolition programme, duly
approved/fixed under the orders of the competent authority, shown no action and returned back on
one pretext or other, but as per action taken register, on the same date the properties were shown
demolished completely or partly which were not mentioned in the list of approved/fixed programme as
per the entries in the register. This shows deviation from already fixed programme of demolition of
properties, needs clarification. A list of such deviations is enclosed as Annexure-A. Why such
deviations is being shown in almost all dates which leads to violation of orders of the Competent
Authority and mandatory requirements of Misal Band Register in which demolition orders have been
shown passed but kept pending for action. For example, the action was fixed to be taken on
02.12.2013 for five number of properties were shown booked for action in 1719-29 Pratap Gali, 4430
Katra Palji, 1340 Sangatroshan, 1601 to 1605 Main Bazar, P.Ganj and 3786-88 Gali Ram Nath in
Pahar Ganj area, S.P.Zone, but action has been shown taken in other two property number 3244 Gali
School wali and 1536 Gali Lallu Missar Pahar Ganj, no action has been shown taken by the demolition
squad on the properties booked in Misal Band Register needs clarification.

An audit memo vide no. IAD/ZAP/SPZ/2014/06 dated 18.9.2014 issued to the department to clarify
the reason in this regard but no reply has been made by the department till date.

PARA NO-14. NON-PRODUCTION OF RECORD

Out of the above requisitioned records, the records at Sl. No.3(P),7,12(20 numbers of G-8 Books
with challan only),14, 28, 30, one file regarding engaging TATA truck, regularization file register and one
action taken register were produced to audit for inspection. No any record as required by the audit was
provided by the department. Either these records are not being maintained by the department or
production of said records has been avoided for the best reasons known to the department. Three
reminders for production of record were issued to the department vides Audit Memo No.
04/IAD/ZAP/SPZ/2014 dated 15.9.2014, 07/IAD/ZAP/SPZ/2014 dated 22.9.2014and
10/IAD/ZAP/SPZ/2014 dated 23.9.2014 but department failed to produce further remaining record. The
Commissioner MCD has issued a circular dt 19/08/2003, where in it has been instructed all the
departments to provide records to audit. It was informed that the department has violated the orders of
Worthy Commissioner and if timely reply is not received we are compelled to report to the authorities
competent.

PARA NO.-15: OTHER IMPORTANT AUDIT OBSERVATIONS

The following observations were noticed in almost all the records maintained in the office of EE (B),
S.P.Zone

1. Mandatory record such as Stock Book/Register of receipt and issue of show cause notice books,
challans etc. were not being maintained. Instructions were given in the previous audit to maintain
such records but no such records were prepared and shown to audit.
11
 12

2. Stock Book of Stationery Items along with indents in original were also not maintained and
produced to audit
3. Shadow files for expenditure incurred of the contingency and other funds showing heavy
expenditures more than Rs.1000/- were not maintained and shown to audit.
4. During the course of audit it was found that in most of the sanctioned bldg. Plan files, there were
no Indemnity Bond, which should be a mandatory requirement.
5. In most of the files, the plan was not cloth mounted.
6. Cuttings/over writings are not attested by the authorities competent.
7. It was noticed that hours involved in the demolition action was not mentioned in Action Taken
Register at many places so it is very difficult to ascertain how much demolition charges are
outstanding against the defaulters it needs clarification.
8. Demolition Register was not page numbred and paging certificated was not given. No supervisory/
periodic check was done by the authority competent.

Internal Audit Officer

ZAP/S P Zone

12