Para 3.2.5 — MSO (Audit)
Original Rule Text
3.2.5 It should also be examined by Audit whether the appointment made by Government itself is valid or not. The procedure that should have been followed by Government before making an appointment is not a matter into which Audit should delve. Unless there are any specific restrictions on the powers of the Government either in the Constitution or in any law or statutory rule, the appointments made should not normally be questioned. Failure to consult the Public Service Commission in cases where such consultation is mandatory under the provisions of the Constitution or under the rules framed thereunder does not make the appointment so made as invalid. Similarly, cases where appointments initially made for a period of six months are extended or where the same individual is appointed afresh on expiry of the initial period of six months without consulting the Commission constitute an infringement of the regulations of the Public Service Commission framed under constitutional provisions. However, failure to adhere to these regulations will not by itself render invalid the appointments so made by the Government.
What This Means
Auditors should examine whether the appointment of a government servant is valid, but they need not delve into the procedural steps the government followed before making the appointment. Unless the Constitution, a law, or a statutory rule specifically restricts the government's power, appointments should not be questioned. Even the failure to consult the Public Service Commission when required, or extending an appointment beyond six months without Commission consultation, does not invalidate the appointment itself — it is an infringement of regulations but does not make the appointment illegal.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Key Points
- 1Audit examines validity of appointment, not the procedural steps before it
- 2Appointments are not questioned unless Constitution, law, or statutory rule restricts them
- 3Failure to consult Public Service Commission does not invalidate the appointment
- 4Extending appointments beyond six months without Commission consultation is an infringement but not invalidating
- 5Auditor focuses on whether the appointment stands legally, not procedural propriety
Practical Example
An auditor finds that a department appointed a gazetted officer to a post requiring Public Service Commission consultation, but no such consultation was done. The officer has been working and drawing pay for two years. The auditor does not disallow the pay already drawn (since the appointment itself is not invalid) but flags the procedural lapse of not consulting the Commission for inclusion in the audit report.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can an auditor question any government appointment?▼
What if the Public Service Commission was not consulted?▼
Does this mean auditors ignore procedural irregularities in appointments?▼
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.