CMDA ducks audit to hide mismatches?

C Shivakumar

Chennai:

Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority is turning a blind eye towards audit report and has not submitted files to be audited despite several reminders, according to a report.

The audit report, which was tabled during the assembly on Monday, also highlights irregularities in filling up of posts, non collection of infrastructure and amenities charges, development charges and premium charges besides non submission of suit register for audit.

Interestingly, the report states that 786 audit objections involving a sum of Rs 694.68 crore is pending settlement at the close of audit as on March 2011.

The report also states that despite several reminders to the finance and the accounts department to submit files for audit, the finance and audit department did not produce it for verification. As per the report, deposits and advances were pending to the tune of Rs 111.62 crore and Rs 108.92 crore respectively at the end of 2011-12.

Interestingly, this was one of the reasons resulting in the government demanding an action taken report and status report on the pending audit paras with explanatory notes and inspection report to be filed within this week.

Interestingly, the report also highlights that CMDA has filled several temporary posts without any approval from the government. Not only that even the age limit and qualifications were ignored in the appointment of assistant engineers and planning assistant Grade I in Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority.As per CMDA approved service regulations, the age limit for appointment of assistant engineer is below 30 years but the above candidates were above 30 and some even did not possess adequate qualifications.

The report also highlights that CMDA officials were sanctioned long-term loans and advances but the recovery never find a mention in the service register. “No advance recovery register is maintained and it was stated that the details are entered in computer every month. A printout of recovery details was not produced to audit even on demand,” the report stated.

The report said the suit register for 2010-11 was not produced to audit the details such as the number of cases filed in High court or Supreme Court, counters filed in such cases whether any appeal preferred by the authority against judgement, the result of such appeal and the payment of legal fees and other charges incurred towards such cases are not known.