-: [rti4empowerment] PIL challenging appointment of C&AG

Friends,

The news item circulated by the Press Trust of India placed below has been reported in the Hindu, Economic Times, Rediff.com, India Today Online, Business Standard, etc. It is a matter of immense public interest.

In addition to the adverse criticism regarding constitutional propriety raised in the P.I.L., there are several practical issues that are under the wrap. Ineffectiveness of the audit process is a major problem area where public debate is needed. Few high profile cases reported by C&AG have recently caught the attention of media are merely a tip of the iceberg. Audit by the Indian Audit and Accounts Department (under the overall directions od C&AG) results in highlighting shortcomings in financial management and waste of public money. Most of the reports are ignored by the executives. Successive C&AGs have not been able to ensure actions on audit findings, despite the empowerment bestowed upon them by the Constitution of India.

Accounts presented by C&AG to Parliament and State Legislature are compiled from the accounts submitted to Indian Audit and Accounts Department (IA&AD) by the Drawing and Disbursing officers (DDOs). If there are errors in accounts reported to Parliament and State Legislature, responsibility is diffused between IA&AD and DDOs. Accounts compiled by Controller General of Accounts also depend upon DDOs of Central Government Departments. In view of rampant corruption and waste of public money, correctness of compiled accounts is suspect. Successive C&AGs have not been able to implement internal controls in Government Departments, to ensure that accounts compiled by them and submitted under their signature are correct.

These are very important issues of public concern. Citizens depend upon professionalism of C&AG in finding workable solution to these complex issues. Therefore person appointed as C&AG should find solution to these problems. P.I.Ls. about appointment of C&AG may result in exposing the adverse consequences of a non-professional approach towards audit and accounts, by generalist officers of IAS appointed by the Government in an opaque manner. Audit and Accounts is not an empty formality; person appointed as C&AG is expected to provide a professional direction to ensure effectiveness of IA&AD in instilling sound system of public finance.

Dhirendra Krishna IA&AS (Retired)

............................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Another PIL in Supreme Court challenging appointment of Shashi Kant Sharma as Comptroller and Auditor General of India

Press Trust of India | Updated: June 03, 2013 17:11 IST

New Delhi: A fresh PIL was on Monday filed in the Supreme Court claiming that the appointment of Shashi Kant Sharma as the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) was arbitrary and made without any transparency.

The latest challenge to Mr Sharma's appointment comes just over a week after the apex court on May 23 agreed to hear a similar plea.

This fresh petition has been filed on behalf of former Chief Election Commissioner N Gopalaswami, former chiefs of Naval Staff Admiral (retd) R H Tahiliani and Admiral (retd) L Ramdas, former Deputy CAG B P Mathur and five other retired bureaucrats.

Auditor vs Government: the final showdown

The petition filed through advocate Prashant Bhushan contends that it was made arbitrarily and "without any system for selection, without any selection committee, any criteria, any evaluation and without any transparency".

In their petition, the nine petitioners have also sought a direction to the Centre to "frame a transparent selection procedure based on definite criteria and constitute a broad non-partisan selection committee, which after calling for applications and nominations would recommend the most suitable person for appointment as CAG".

Their petition stated they had filed an RTI application on February 21, 2013 "seeking information as to what is the system of appointment, whether there is any selection committee, what is the zone of consideration, what are the criteria, etc." and added that the response given by Director in the Ministry of Finance of May 2013 "clearly shows there is no search committee, no criterion, no system, no call for applications or nominations and is therefore arbitrary 'pick and choose'."

One of the several grounds raised in the fresh plea filed on Monday, is that during his tenure as DG (Acquisitions) or as the Defence Secretary, Mr Sharma cleared several major defence purchases, some of which have turned out to be a source of embarrassment to the Centre.

The defence deals referred to in the petition include procurement of 12 VVIP choppers from Anglo-Italian firm AgustaWestland for the Indian Air Force at a cost of Rs. 3,500 crore, which according to Italian investigators involved kickbacks of at least Rs. 350 crore.

Another defence contract cleared during Mr Sharma's tenure as DG (Acquisitions) was the conversion of Russia's discarded warship Admiral Gorshkov into a full modern aircraft carrier, renamed INS Vikramaditya, originally scheduled to be delivered by August 2008 at a total cost of $947 million and the cost of which has "shot up" to $2.9 billion with the vessel still not delivered, the petition said.

The Tatra truck deal, which erupted into a major scam, was also cleared by Mr Sharma, the petition said.

The petition submitted these major defence acquisitions made over the last few years were cleared by Mr Sharma and now as CAG if he audits these expenditures, it would lead to a conflict of interest as he would be auditing the defence purchases he himself sanctioned.

The petition also contended that as CAG he can't recuse himself from the auditing process as there no such provision under the Constitution or the CAG Act and also since the CAG is a single-member body, and if he recuses himself an audit won't be possible.

The petition also claimed that the apex court's judgement dismissing the appointment of Central Vigilance Commissioner P J Thomas applies to this case as well.

The petitioners included Kamal Kant Jaswal, Ramaswamy R Iyer, E A S Sarma, all former secretaries in various government ministries and also S Krishnan, former Indian Audits and Accounts Service officer and M G Devasahayam, former IAS officer.

Mr Sharma was sworn in as CAG by President Pranab Mukherjee on May 23. The 61-year-old cadre IAS officer replaced Vinod Rai, who had demitted office a day earlier after a five-and-a-half year tenure.

The very same day, the apex court had agreed to hear in July, the plea filed by advocate M L Sharma, who challenged Mr Sharma's appointment on the ground that he had in the last 10 years held several sensitive positions in the defence ministry that dealt with significant procurements and appointing him as CAG would mean a conflict of interest.