CHAPTER 2
INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH

*    includes 23 projects terminated midway or had not even started

2.1.5.1.5    Non-implementation of recommendations

Test check of records of minutes of meetings of the SRC/RAC held during 1995-2000 revealed that:

(i)    the concerned Divisions were not informed of the decisions and recommendations of the SRC/RAC for compliance.

(ii)    the proceedings were required to be sent to the ICAR for approval and review by the Director General. This was, however, not done. Thus, the IARI kept ICAR in the dark about the quality of research done and internal deficiencies existing in the system of research done in IARI.

(iii)    the decisions and recommendations made in one meeting were not submitted in the subsequent meetings for confirmation

IARI undertook 81 research projects funded from Agricultural Produce (AP) Cess Fund during 1995-2001. Of these, 14 had been carried over from previous years. Of these 81 projects, the IARI could complete 40 projects incurring an expenditure of Rs 4.56 crore. 18 out of 40 completed projects costing Rs 1.55 crore were test checked. It was observed that in five projects, as detailed below, the objectives were not achieved fully.

(i)    In one of the projects namely - production of molecular probes for detection of citrus ring-spot and mosaic virus (June 1996 to August 1999) implemented at a total cost of Rs14.64 lakh, it was observed that the results obtained in the project were not utilised for the development of bud wood certification against the ring-spot and mosaic virus. The progress report revealed that unless this was done, the protection programme for citrus improvement in the country would be a futile exercise.

ICAR stated (June 2001) that bud wood certification programme might be enforced by legislation/notification through Central or State governments in due course of time. But ICAR did not initiate any action either with the Centre or with State Governments.

(ii)    In another project viz. Soil solarisation - a non-chemical approach for management of weeds implemented during November 1994 to April 1999 at a cost of Rs 7.93 lakh, it was observed that the recommendations of SRC in February 1997 that the work of soil solarisation should be re-examined, was not implemented. Further, as per the comments of the referee, study on the autoecology of the perennial weed was required to be undertaken in different temperatures in controlled temperature growth chambers to generate further information. This was also not carried out resulting in non-achievement of important objective of evaluation of effect of soil solarisation on the germination and viability of important weeds. Therefore, the expenditure of Rs 7.93 lakh remained unfruitful.

ICAR did not specifically reply to the point on non-conducting of studies in different temperatures in controlled temperature growth chambers.

(iii)    In the project- Production of fruit based beverages at pilot plant scale, implemented during June 1994 to July 1997 at a cost of Rs 4.77 lakh, the final report revealed that the results obtained were erratic and needed further confirmation. No action was taken for further confirmation of results. Apart from this, one of the objectives, namely, microbiological observations could not be made for want of specific methodology. Therefore, the expenditure of Rs 4.77 lakh was unfruitful.

ICAR confirmed (June 2001) that the microbiological observations were erratic and needed further confirmation

(iv)    On the project-Sulphur nutrition of oil seed crops and computation of its balance sheet, an expenditure of Rs 7.11 lakh was incurred during December 1995 to November 1998. Scrutiny of the project revealed that evaluation of different forms of sulphur in soil of different ecological zones and to develop a fractionation scheme which was one of the objectives was not achieved due to non-conducting of study.

ICAR accepted (June 2001) that the attempts made to develop a fractionation procedure were not successful.

(v)    Scrutiny of the project- Investigations on the impact of cropping system on the recurrence of major wheat diseases with special reference to Karnal bunt implemented during January 1994 to January 1997 at a cost of Rs 4.39 lakh revealed that biological research to develop markers for quick detection of pathotypes and bench mark surveys of soil borne diseases to see the effect based cropping system on the recurrence of minor pathogenes, as suggested in the final report were not undertaken. ICAR stated in June 2001 that biological control of Karnal bunt and evaluation of germplasm was in progress and added that work on the pest risk analysis would be undertaken in the near future.

Thus, the expenditure of Rs 38.84 lakh incurred on these five projects remained unfruitful. It was further observed that none of the five projects mentioned above, was ever evaluated by the ICAR and acceptance of final report communicated to the IARI.

The IARI undertook 87 research projects sponsored by other Government departments during 1995-2001, which included 25 projects carried over from previous years. Only 40 projects were completed. The following points emerged during a test check of records:

IARI did not take any action to recover the excess expenditure of Rs 75.12 lakh in sponsored schemes

Excess expenditure incurred on sponsored schemes and non-reimbursement thereof from the sponsoring agencies had been commented upon in paragraph 4.1 of the Report of Comptroller and Auditor General of India (Scientific Departments) for the year ended 31 March 1995. The ICAR in its Action Taken Note in October 1996 had stated that the funding agencies had been requested to expedite the remittance of funds. Scrutiny of records revealed that the IARI continued to incur excess expenditure to the tune of Rs 75.12 lakh as of March 2001. Of this, Rs 48.44 lakh remained unreimbursed for a period of more than three years.

ICAR stated in June 2001 that the final figure of excess expenditure would be known only after the issue of audit utilisation certificate and added that wherever excess expenditure was made, sponsoring agencies were requested to remit the dues. However, no action was taken to obtain audit certificates for more than three years. This indicates lack of an effective system for timely settlement of accounts and issue of utilisation certificates.

During 1995-2001, the IARI implemented 74 projects funded by International Organisations like World Bank and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), which included 15 carried over from the previous years. It completed 17 projects at a total outlay of Rs 23.34 crore. Test check of seven projects with an expenditure of Rs 17.89 crore revealed following audit comments:

2.1.5.4.1    Under-utilisation of National Phytotron Facility

The National Phytotron Facility established at a cost of Rs 10.55 crore was not utilised effectively

With the assistance of UNDP, National Phytotron Facility, meant to provide controlled environment for study of response of plants to climatic conditions, was established at the IARI in December 1998 at a total cost of Rs 10.55 crore. The facility, which started functioning from January 1999 had 22 Plant Growth Chambers and 10 Green Houses (Glass Houses) to carry out research. Audit scrutiny revealed that all the 22 plant growth chambers remained unused intermittently for periods ranging from 10 days to 342 days, while all the glasshouses remained non-functional for the periods ranging from four days to 537 days, during January 1999 to June 2000. The facility had been utilised only by the scientists of the IARI although it was meant for all the Institutes of the ICAR, State Agricultural Universities and other agencies engaged in agricultural research. Thus, the facility established at a cost of Rs 10.55 crore remained under-utilised.

ICAR stated (June 2001) that this was a new avenue in agricultural research and most of the ongoing projects had no inputs for its exploitation and added that a number of efforts had been made to promote the use of National Phytotron Facility among the institutions other than IARI. The reply is not acceptable since it indicates that the ICAR and IARI had not planned adequately for optimum utilisation for the phytotron facility on which Rs 10.55 crore had been invested.

2.1.5.4.2    Unproductive expenditure

Under World Bank aided National Agricultural Research Project (NARP), Water Technology Centre (WTC) of the IARI, imported three plant growth chambers from Canada, along with accessories in May 1995 at a total cost of Rs 28.14 lakh. WTC imported one more growth chamber in March 1997 at a cost of Rs 14.12 lakh. Due to delay in getting the required power supply, IARI could install the growth chambers only in December 1998.

Non-functioning of 10 plant growth chambers resulted in un-productive expenditure of Rs 61.76 lakh

Further, scrutiny of the logbooks of these chambers revealed that three growth chambers were utilised only for 13 experiments from December 1998 to March 2000. The WTC did not produce logbook of the other growth chamber. The 13 experiments carried out in the chambers were subsequently shifted to National Phytotron Facility (NPF) midway in March 2000 due to failure of all the growth chambers for technical reasons. Thereafter, all the four chambers remained non-functional and no action was taken to repair them.

Similarly, National Research Centre (NRC) on Plant Bio-technology procured nine growth chambers costing Rs 29.25 lakh between 1990 and 1995 for research and teaching. Of these, six chambers remained non-functional since 1995 onward due to technical problems. The IARI did not take any action for their repair. Thus, the entire expenditure of Rs 61.76 lakh incurred for the 10 growth chambers was largely unproductive.

ICAR stated in June 2001 that the chambers had already been used for studies, which did not succeed for more than 25 years. The reply is not acceptable because the chambers installed in December 1998 were under operation only for four months from December 1999 to March 2000 during which period experiments were shifted due to technical faults in the growth chambers. Regarding non-functioning of six growth chambers procured by NRC on Plant Biotechnology, ICAR stated that due to some technical problems the repair could not be done and scientists managed their work with the remaining functional growth chambers. However, the reply was silent about rectification of technical faults of growth chambers at WTC.

2.1.5.4.3    Unauthorised expenditure

IARI incurred unauthorised expenditure of Rs 20.10 lakh on other projects

Under the assistance of European Economic Community, Nuclear Research Laboratory (NRL) of the IARI implemented a project namely “Research on the fine structure of cotton fibres, on factors that determine this structure and on the significance of this structure for the technological value of the fibres” at a total cost of Rs 37.56 lakh, during January 1994 to September 1997. Contrary to the instructions of the ICAR that no equipment should be purchased after the completion of the project, NRL purchased 21 equipments costing Rs 9.03 lakh and a computer with accessories worth Rs 8.34 lakh during November 1997 to May 1999 after the completion of the project in September 1997. Further, it also incurred an expenditure of Rs 2.73 lakh on items not related to the project. IARI had disregarded the instructions given by the ICAR and the entire expenditure of Rs 20.10 lakh was therefore unauthorised.

The Director, IARI stated in September 2000 that majority of the equipments purchased after September 1997 were for research projects namely ‘Structure property studies on fibres of naturally coloured cotton fibres and on the role of moisture hysteresis in screening cereal and other crops for rainfed cultivation’, and meeting specific requirements of NRL in general and some scientists in particular. The reply is not tenable since the IARI had violated ICAR instructions that no expenditure should be incurred on completed projects.

Research and other activities of the IARI were not monitored

The non-functioning of the Research Council had been highlighted in the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (Scientific Departments) for the year ended 31 March 1995. The ICAR, in its Action Taken Note in October 1996, had stated that the Research Advisory Council (RAC) and Staff Research Council (SRC) had been constituted and were meeting periodically as prescribed. However, these bodies and Board of Management (BOM), Extension Council and Executive Council did not meet during 1995-2001 according to the norms fixed for their meetings.

The details of the meetings and the reasons for shortfall as stated by the IARI in May 2000 / August 2001 are given below:

Thus, the monitoring of Research and other activities of the IARI was not carried out at various levels as required. Consequently, the institutional arrangements for selection, review and evaluation of research projects and other functions in the IARI did not work effectively.

ICAR had constituted a Quinquennial Review Team (QRT) in November 1997 to review the activities of the IARI for the period 1990-97. But the Team was yet to commence the review. ICAR stated (June 2001) that information was being collected to update the status report and that the QRT would start reviewing the activities very soon.

Development and release of high yielding varieties of seeds for major crops is a priority of IARI. Examination of the IARI’s activities in this regard revealed the following shortcomings :

During 1995-2001, the IARI released 44 seed varieties of major crops like wheat (14), paddy (1), maize (8), pearl millets (5), forage sorghum (2) and vegetable crops (14).

Breeder seed for varieties released by the IARI were not produced, indicating lack of demand from the farmers

The IARI, however, produced 594.2 quintals of breeder seed (Breeder seed is the first stage of seed multiplication system and is produced from the nucleus seed obtained from breeders or developed by the seed producing agencies under the direct supervision of experts.) only for two varieties of wheat namely HD-2643 and HW-2004 during 1995-2000. IARI did not furnish details of breeder seed produced during 2000-2001. It did not receive indents for production of breeder seed of the other varieties from the Ministry of Agriculture. This indicated lack of demand of the varieties. The IARI had also not devised any feed back system to ascertain whether its released varieties were well accepted by farming community.

ICAR stated (June 2001) that 594.2 quintals breeder seed of wheat varieties HD 2643 and HW 2004 were produced during 1995-2000. Further, 5.1 quintals of Paddy against the demand of 2.8 quintals, 8 quintals of two varieties of maize and 5010 quintals of two varieties of forage sorghum were produced during 1999-2001 and that the breeder seed production for other varieties were being undertaken during 2000-2001. However, the reply of IARI was silent about the production of breeder seed of other varieties.

IARI did not take remedial action to release the varieties developed and identified for release

The yield and disease resistance of seven varieties of wheat namely, HS-361, HS-364, HS-375, HS 396, HW-2043, HW-2045 and HW-2028 developed during 1995-2000, was found to be comparatively poor during field trials. Another variety HS-295 was not recommended for release by the Central Sub-Committee on crop standards, notification and release of varieties in May 1991. The IARI did not take any further action to improve the strains and to release them.

The IARI also did not make efforts to analyse the reasons and overcome the problems faced during trials of the following varieties:

IARI did not analyse the reasons for the poor performance of varieties of crops

ICAR stated in June 2001 that breeding new strains and their testing for yield and resistance to disease was a continuous process. It also added that the varieties could not be released for various reasons. ICAR did not provide the reasons for poor performance during the field trials and action taken to improve the strains. Further, the statement of ICAR that the variety HS295 had been released in the year 1990 is not correct as the same variety was rejected for release by the Central Sub-Committee on crop standards, notification and release of varieties in May 1991.

The total quantity of breeder seed lying in stock as of March 2000 was 651 quintals (costing Rs 16.80 lakh) in 12 varieties of cereals and pulses, which were produced between 1994 and 2000. However, the IARI did not take any action for the disposal of the seeds remained in stock. IARI did not furnish the stock as of March 2001.

ICAR stated (June 2001) that the Ministry of Agriculture had been addressed to get the breeder seed lifted by the concerned state governments.

The target and objectives of Central Seed Testing Laboratory were not achieved

Central Seed Testing Laboratory (CSTL) had been strengthened to increase its capability to test 25,000 seed samples annually. However, it tested samples ranging from 7000 to 8000 per year during 1995-2001, which was below 50 per cent of the targeted samples. CSTL was also required to conduct purity and germination test for five percent of the total samples of seeds tested by State Seed Testing laboratories (SSTLs). However, without ascertaining the total number of samples tested by SSTLs annually, CSTL received samples ranging from 4000 to 10,000 per annum from less than 45 out of 90 SSTLs during 1995-2001. Market survey to ensure sale of quality seed, which was one of the objectives of CSTL, was also not conducted during 1995-2001.

ICAR stated in June 2001 that in future all the SSTLs would be asked to send information about the total number of samples tested by them annually. ICAR also stated that a market survey had been conducted in respect of vegetable seeds.

Providing leadership in agricultural extension, technology assessment and transfer is one of the objectives of the IARI. Test check of projects revealed the following deficiencies.

In order to improve the quality of manpower in the field of agriculture extension through training, teaching and research activities, extension division of the IARI operated a scheme “Centre for Advanced Studies (CAS)” for agricultural scientists of the ICAR institutes, State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) and State Agriculture Departments.

As per the ICAR guidelines, training courses were to be conducted for 30 participants for 10/21/30 days. The details of training courses conducted by the IARI during 1995-99 are as follows:

IARI did not conduct trainings effectively to improve the quality of manpower

In none of the courses did the required number of 30 trainees participate. The duration of the courses was also not as per the guidelines of the ICAR. Consequently, the IARI incurred only Rs 33.38 lakh out of Rs 57.08 lakh allocated during 1994-99 for this purpose. The IARI had also not devised any feed back system to ascertain the impact of the training.

The reply of ICAR (June 2001) that participants not exceeding 20 were found ideal was contradictory to its own guidelines, which felt that 30 participants were necessary for the training.

In accordance with instructions of the ICAR, technology developed and know-how generated by its institutes should be patented. However, 22 technologies developed by eight divisions of the IARI during 1995-2000 were not patented. IARI stated that action on the patent applications would be taken by ICAR. ICAR had no further comments to offer (June 2001).

Division of Plant Pathology transferred a technology “Bioformulations Kalisena SD and Kalisena SL” to M/s Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad without patenting the technology. Against the premia of Rs 10 lakh, the IARI could realise Rs 5.00 lakh as the firm did not make the payment of balance amount. The IARI could also not collect 2.5 per cent royalty as of June 2001.

ICAR stated in June 2001 that out of two formulations one was still under test, which may be the reason for balance Rs 5 lakh not being paid and only recently had one product been launched. It further stated that an application was submitted by IARI for patenting the bioformulations. Transferring technologies to commercial firms without patenting them indicates the failure of ICAR to protect its intellectual property rights and its own interests.

IARI did not take action either to commercialise its technologies or to render consultancy services

Board of Management and Research Advisory Council of the IARI had approved in May 1997 the commercialisation of products, technologies, services and training with money value upto Rs 70 lakh so as to provide competitive ability as well as economic advantage for sustaining and enlarging the research efforts. However, the IARI did not take any action either to commercialise the technologies or to render consultancy services which was evident from the reply of the Divisions of the IARI as detailed below:

a)    Division of Nematology stated that biocontrol agents (value Rs 2000) identified was used for experimental work and their commercialisation had not been made so far. Division of Entomology also stated that biocontrol agents were used in research studies both in the laboratory as well as in the fields and no sale was made during 1995-2000.

b)    Division of Soil science and Agricultural chemistry stated that the division had not produced or sold any soil test kit (value Rs 1500) during last three decades. A model was developed during the sixties and it was manufactured by a firm at Hyderabad at that time and since then there had not been any attempt in this direction.

c)    Division of Agricultural chemicals stated that whenever requests for analysis of the samples had been received, those samples had been analysed.

The reply of ICAR (June 2001) that the technologies were brought to the notice of entrepreneurs, published through a book entitled “A Handbook on commercialisation of research products and services” is not tenable in audit as no effective measures were taken to commercialise the technologies.

The terms and conditions of the schedule governing the Grant-in-aid from the ICAR stipulate that the results of the investigations and research, unless specifically approved by the Director General ICAR, should be first published in ICAR journals.

Test check revealed that 10 Divisions of the IARI did not follow these instructions and without the approval of Director General of the ICAR, published research papers in other scientific journals before these were published in the ICAR journals.

Accepting the facts, the IARI stated in November 2000 that the scientists were not aware of the procedure and that in future correct procedure would be followed. Further, publication of papers in top referred journals is one of the key indicators identified by ICAR to evaluate the performance of the Institute. However, in these 10 Divisions, it was noticed that 1138 research papers were published by the scientists whose number ranged from 208 to 215 during 1995-2000. Thus, the average contribution of scientific publications by each scientist per annum was only 1.07 in these 10 Divisions.

ICAR in June 2001 stated that since the publication of papers had been liberalized, scientists could send the papers for publication even without the approval of Head/Director if the same was not reviewed in 15 days time and that the research work was published in National and International journals as per procedure.

In order to serve as a centre for academic excellence in the area of postgraduate education and human resources development in agricultural sciences, the IARI was conferred the status of a Deemed University in 1958. It awards M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in 20 different disciplines. Test check of this aspect revealed the following shortcomings:

The details of number of faculty members, students admitted and awarded M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in the IARI during 1995-2001 are given below :

As compared to the faculty, the number of students admitted and awarded postgraduate degrees was very small

The number of faculty members ranged from 491 to 548 during 1995-96 to 2000-01. However, the number of students admitted and awarded degrees was continuously decreasing except in 1997-98. The highest number of students admitted was 208 in 1997-98. Further, the strength of the faculty members was extraordinarily high in relation to the number of students admitted. On an average, over the period 1995-96 to 2000-01, the strength of faculty members were three times the strength of students.

IARI did not furnish information regarding the number of students who left in the middle of the course. IARI stated in August 2001 that the information regarding students who left midway would be furnished in due course. It further stated that no provision was available to prevent the students leaving midway or to take action against them. However, steps need to be taken to discourage students leaving courses midway since the expenditure incurred for each student of M.Sc. and Ph.D. was about Rs 0.44 lakh and Rs 0.63 lakh respectively per annum.

All these facts point out that the objective of IARI as a centre for academic excellence in post-graduate education and human resource development in Agricultural Sciences could not be achieved in full despite the fact that strength of faculty members during 1995-2001 was three times the number of students admitted for different courses.

To recognise outstanding and eminent scientists and to develop strong centres of research and education around them in the field of agriculture and allied sciences, the ICAR had financed four schemes of National Professor and five schemes of National Fellow to the IARI at a total outlay of Rs 4.10 crore and 1.54 crore respectively during 1995-2001. Scrutiny of records of six schemes (four of National Professor and two of National Fellow) revealed the following facts:

Progress report and expenditure statement were not submitted

(i)    Each awardee of the scheme was required to submit annual progress report alongwith the progress of expenditure to the ICAR at the end of December each year. In one scheme namely, ‘Drought tolerance mechanism in crops’, awarded to Dr. S.K. Sinha for implementation during January 1995 to July 1999 completed at a total cost of Rs 1.08 crore, neither the progress report nor expenditure statement was submitted. Contrary to the condition that each scheme should be reviewed by a Committee to be set up by the ICAR, the said scheme, was not reviewed by the ICAR after its completion.

The reply of ICAR was silent about the review of the project by a committee.

ICAR released Rs 11.50 lakh two times resulting in excess release of Rs 11.50 lakh

(ii)    In the project ‘Monocarpic senescence, in relation to sink size and draught’, the ICAR inadvertently released Rs 11.50 lakh for equipment, twice in 1995-96 and in 1996-97, resulting in excess release of Rs 11.50 lakh. The IARI, instead of refunding the excess amount, spent Rs 4.66 lakh and refunded only Rs 6.84 lakh to the ICAR, after a lapse of four years in March 2000. This excess expenditure of Rs 4.66 lakh was not regularised by the ICAR.

The reply of ICAR (June 2001) that the amount was refunded to ICAR and no expenditure was met out of this amount is not tenable since as per records out of Rs 11.50 lakh, only Rs 6.84 lakh was refunded to ICAR and the balance of Rs 4.66 lakh was spent which was not got regularized.

A sum of Rs 22.57 crore was outstanding as of March 2001 against the deposits made by the IARI with Central Public Works Department (CPWD) for execution of various works from time to time. Of this, advances of Rs 10.59 crore for 462 items of works were outstanding for three to 15 years.

ICAR stated (June 2001) that so far Rs 1.90 crore had been adjusted and that the matter had been brought to the notice of Chief Engineer CPWD for adjustment. However, the fact remained that advances of Rs 2.08 crore for 157 items of works remained outstanding for more than a decade. Major works like construction of 10 glasshouses, National Phytotron Facility, Lal Bahadur Shastri Centre for Advanced Research in Biotechnology and Crop Protection and their maintenance were test checked and comments are detailed in the succeeding paragraphs.

Glass House Complex to be completed by September 1989 was not yet completed as of December 2000 even after an expenditure of Rs 1.14 crore

Non-completion of construction of glasshouses due to delay and inadequate budget provisions for electrical requirements was brought out in Paragraph 4.1.9 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (Scientific Departments) for the year ended March 1995. The ICAR in its Action Taken Note in October 1996 had stated that two glasshouses had been handed over in November 1995. However, out of 10 glasshouses to be completed by September 1989 at a cost of Rs 98.58 lakh, the IARI took over only five glasshouses (between November 1995 and July 1999) without adequate electrical and water supply, which resulted in non-utilisation of the facility for research activities as of December 2000. All the 10 glasshouses including five under construction were damaged due to inadequate maintenance. Materials and fittings for water, electricity and air conditioners of the glasshouses were found missing and some were in unserviceable condition. The IARI had incurred Rs 15.27 lakh during the year 1998-99 for replacing the missing items. Further, 24 air conditioners, 48 stabilizers from two out of five glasshouses which were not completed, were taken over by the Glasshouse Committee in June 1996. The Committee obtained an undertaking from CPWD that the demonstration of the glasshouses would be done as soon as power supply was restored. No further progress was made for the demonstration of the glasshouses even after lapse of five years. Thus, even after a lapse of more than a decade (from 1989) and after incurring an expenditure of Rs 1.14 crore, the purpose of construction of glasshouses remained unachieved to a large extent.

ICAR, while confirming the facts stated (June 2001) that CPWD had partly handed over the glasshouses. However, the fact remained that the glasshouse complex has not been fully completed. Further, the reply was silent about the status of air conditioners and stabilizers which were taken over by the Glasshouse Committee in June 1996.

IARI did not recover Rs 11.35 lakh from a construction agency, although construction was completed in December 1998

The construction of National Phytotron Facility (NPF) was awarded to M/s National Projects Construction Company (NPCC) in May 1994. The IARI deposited Rs 4.54 crore with NPCC during September 1994 to April 1998. There was an unspent balance of Rs 11.35 lakh with NPCC, which was not refunded to the IARI although the construction was completed in December 1998. The advice of Chief Finance and Accounts Officer (CFAO) of the IARI that the amount of Rs 11.35 lakh was a saving to the project and therefore, should be refunded to the ICAR, was over-ruled by the Director, IARI. Rs 4.48 lakh out of Rs 11.35 lakh was adjusted towards the maintenance charges of National Phytotron Facility for the months of March 2000 to June 2000 without the approval of the ICAR. In reply to audit, the IARI stated in July 2000 that NPCC had been asked to refund the excess amount of Rs 11.35 lakh.

ICAR stated (June 2001) that in future, plan funds would not be appropriated for non-plan works. However, it did not mention the action taken for the recovery of Rs 11.35 lakh from NPCC.

IARI did not adjust excess payment of electricity charges of Rs 27.07 lakh

Prior to installation of electric meter, Delhi Vidyut Board (DVB) charged at the flat rate of 2 lakh units per month for the electricity consumed by National Phytotron Facility. Accordingly, a sum of Rs 34.07 lakh was paid to DVB towards electricity charges during February 1999 to May 1999 subject to final adjustment after installation of energy meter and on actual load consumption basis. The energy meter was installed on 1 May 1999 and the average consumption per month ascertained was 50,000 units. Accordingly, the electricity charges for four months from February 1999 to May 1999 worked out to Rs 7 lakh. The excess amount of Rs 27.07 lakh paid to DVB, which was to be adjusted against the future consumption of electricity, was not adjusted as of July 2000.

ICAR stated in June 2001 that the matter was being pursued with DVB.

IARI incurred excess expenditure of Rs 3.67 crore towards electricity charges

Non-upgradation of temporary electricity load of 500 KW to the sanctioned load of 1494.76 KW in the Lal Bahadur Shastri Centre for Advanced Research in Biotechnology and Crop Protection was commented upon in paragraph 4.1.9 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (Scientific Departments) for the year ended March 1995. The ICAR, in its Action Taken Note in October 1996, had stated that full load and permanent connection could be issued only when the building completion certificate was submitted and that the IARI was approaching Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) for this purpose. However, scrutiny of records revealed that the IARI continued to incur Rs 5.50 crore towards electricity charges for the same building during 1995-2000 on the basis of sanctioned load of 1494.76 KW without upgrading the temporary load of 500 KW. The IARI had still not obtained the completion certificate from MCD. Consequently, the IARI had to incur an avoidable expenditure of Rs 3.67 crore, being the excess expenditure incurred on the basis of 1494.76 KW against the utilisation of 500 KW. The IARI stated in September 2000 that it was not making excess payment to Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking (DESU). The reply is not tenable as the Director General, ICAR had already brought to the notice of Municipal Commissioner, MCD in June 1996 the excess payment being made to DESU.

ICAR stated (June 2001) that as per the information of CPWD in December 2000, Delhi Vidyut Board (DVB) had already released the permanent connection in anticipation of building completion certificate and presently electric bills were being received for permanent load. However, ICAR did not specify the date from which temporary load had been upgraded. It is also evident that the matter of obtaining the permanent connection had been inordinately delayed.

Staff position of the IARI during 1995-2001 is given below: