Para 3.8.29 — MSO (Audit)
Original Rule Text
3.8.29 In many schemes, particularly those in which the resources are spread thinly over many small works and similar works are taken up for execution under different schemes, assurance of actual physical existence of the assets assumes importance. Accountants General may select the assets stated to have been created at random and request the District Magistrate or Executive Officer at a fairly senior level to arrange for a joint inspection of these assets to generate independent evidence. The findings of the inspection should be recorded. If the District Magistrate or Executive Officer refuses to comply with the request, this fact should also be mentioned in the review after issuing a suitable audit observation. The Group Officers' involvement in joint inspections should be necessary in all cases. As far as possible, efforts should be made to get the evidence attested. Accountants General may devise appropriate guidelines for achieving this objective and monitoring the fulfilment of this requirement. Audit of agencies actually implementing the works and other major components should also be undertaken wherever possible to ascertain the end use of the funds and other resources and to frame suitable comments. Besides, as and when it is decided to engage an outside agency for beneficiary survey, Accountants General shall provide necessary assistance to them.
- Manpower resources
What This Means
In schemes where resources are spread thinly over many small works, physical verification of assets becomes critical. Accountants General should randomly select assets stated to have been created and request the District Magistrate or a senior executive officer to conduct a joint inspection. The findings must be recorded and, where possible, evidence attested. If the District Magistrate refuses the request, this refusal itself should be mentioned in the review. Group Officers must be involved in all joint inspections. External agencies may also be engaged for beneficiary surveys, with Accountants General providing necessary assistance.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Key Points
- 1Physical verification of assets is critical for schemes with many small works
- 2Random selection of assets for joint inspection ensures objectivity
- 3District Magistrate or senior officer should conduct the joint inspection
- 4Refusal to cooperate must be documented in the review
- 5Group Officers must be involved in all joint inspections
- 6External agencies may be engaged for beneficiary surveys
Practical Example
Under a rural sanitation scheme, 50,000 household toilets were reported as constructed across a state. The Accountant General randomly selects 200 toilets across five districts and writes to the District Magistrates requesting joint physical verification. In four districts, the inspection reveals that 30% of the listed toilets either don't exist or are incomplete. In the fifth district, the District Magistrate declines the inspection request. The audit team records the refusal, includes it in the review, and proposes engagement of an external agency for a comprehensive beneficiary survey. The Group Officer participates in each inspection and attests the findings.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why request the District Magistrate for joint inspection?▼
What if the inspected assets are found to be non-existent?▼
Why is the Group Officer's involvement mandatory?▼
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.