Para 3.18.10 — MSO (Audit)
Original Rule Text
3.18.10 Projects taken up by the ministry/department or in-house by individual laboratories and institutes have to be segregated in terms of their expectations depending upon whether the aim was only basic research or technology development. Cases where technology could not be developed because of significant deviations from the initial process or procedure would need to be highlighted. The technology developed in fastevolving, frontier areas of science often proves to be of little or no utility on account of obsolescence. This aspect and whether such obsolescence could have been avoided would also need to be examined by Audit.
What This Means
Auditors must separate projects by their objectives — whether they aim at basic research or technology development — and evaluate them accordingly. When technology development fails due to significant deviations from initial plans, it must be highlighted. In fast-evolving scientific fields, auditors should also examine whether technology obsolescence was foreseeable and could have been avoided with better planning.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Key Points
- 1Segregate projects by objective: basic research vs. technology development
- 2Highlight cases where technology development failed due to process deviations
- 3Examine whether technological obsolescence was foreseeable
- 4Assess whether obsolescence could have been avoided with better planning
- 5Fast-evolving frontier science areas carry higher obsolescence risk
Practical Example
A CSIR laboratory spent Rs. 12 crore over 5 years developing a solar cell technology. By the time the project concluded, international advances had made the technology obsolete — newer materials offered double the efficiency at half the cost. The auditor examines whether the laboratory had a technology monitoring mechanism in place and whether the obsolescence risk was flagged in mid-project reviews. Finding that no such reviews occurred, the auditor comments on the lack of technology watch mechanisms.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it fair to blame a research lab for technology obsolescence?▼
What counts as a 'significant deviation' from initial process?▼
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.