Transcript Report of visit to Sawai Madhopur and Tonk Districts of

TOUR REPORT AS AREA OFFICER OF Rajasthan (20-23rd October, 2011)
I, Ram Raj Meena, Under Secretary(RC) was deputed for field visit as an Area Officer under Area Officer Scheme to see the
implementation of Rural Development schemes in Rajasthan State from 20th to 23rd October, 2011. I visited Sawai Madhopur on 20th
& 21st October, 2011 and Tonk District on 22nd & 23rd October, 2011.
2. It would be prudent to mention here that Panchayati Raj was introduced for the first time on October, 1959 in Rajasthan. The
Panchayati Raj is prevalent in the State and the three tier Pahchayati Raj Institutions i.e. Gram Panchayat at Village level,
Panchayat Samiti at Block level and Zilla Parisad at District level are fully functional in the State and PRIs are playing a vital role in
implementation of the rural developmental schemes of this Ministry in the State.
3. Field Visit in Sawai Madhopur District
3.1 Review Meeting :
A Review Meeting with the concerned officers was held on 20th October, 2011 about 9:30 AM to 11.45AM at District Hqrs Sawai
Madhopur. The following officers/Officials were present in the review Meeting:-
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.
x.
xi.
xii.
xiii.
xiv.
xv.
xvi.
Shri Giriraj Kumar Verma, CEO, Zilla Parisad, Sawai Madhopur
Shri C. L. Verman, Superintending Engineer , PWD, Sawai Madhopur
Shri Mohar Singh Meena, Executive Engineer, PWD, Gangapur City
Shri Ramawatar Trivedi, Executive Enginner, PWD, Sawai Madhopur
Shri Jai Lal Meena, Executive Engineer, PWD, Baunli
Shri S. R. Chauhan, Executive Engineer, Zilla Paridad, Sawai Madhopur
Shri M. N. Tirgar, In charge BDO, Sawai Madhopur Block
Shri Sujan Sarkar, DF, UNJCP
Shri Braj Kishor, Managar, SGSY, Sawai Madhopur
Shri S. N. Sharma, Assistant Engineer, Zill Parisad, Sawai Madhopur
Shri Vishnu Datt Sharma, Manager, Sawai Madhopur
Shri Deepak Gandhi, AAO EGS, Zilla Parishad, Sawai Madhopur
Shri Hari Mohan Sinhal, Junior Engineer, Zill parishad, Sawai Madhopur
Shri Shiv Prakash Somani, DEO(S), Sawai Madhopur
Shri Iqbal Ahmed Asstt. DEO(S), Sawai Madhopur
Shri R. S. Prajapati, Junior Accountant, Social Welfare, Sawai Madhopur
1
Details discussion on the status of implementation of the various rural developmental schemes of the Ministry of Rural Development in Sawai
Madhopur district was held in the review meeting. The issues intimated by the programme Divisions were also discussed. The points emerged during
the discussion are elaborated in brief scheme-wise as under:-
Sl.No
Scheme
3.1.1
MGNREGA
Discussions
Sawai Madhopur is a Phase-II MGNREGA District. DRDA
implements the MGNREGA programme in the District. Total rural
householders in the districts is 213482 out of which BPL House
Holders are 43029. No. of jobcards issued under the programme
are 219313. The minimum wage rate under the programme in the
district is Rs.119 per day. The projected persondays employment
for the current year 2011-12 is 58.62 lakh and projected financial
requirement for the current financial year is Rs.127.20 crores.
The opening balance under the programme as on 1/4/2011
was Rs. 58.46 crore. The utilization during first half of the financial
year is Rs. 18.85 crore which is 32% of the available funds. In
terms of their annual targets, it is just 15% of the targeted funds
requirement. In this regards, I was told that utilization has been
adversely affected by the following factors :-
SWM/1-Review Meeting at Sawai Madhopur
 the scheme is demand drawn and there was less demand for
employment under the programme due to good rain during
monsoon season since last two years; and
 due to hike in wage rate in open market than the wage paid
under MGNREGA, people prefer to do other private works
instead doing work under MGNREGA.
The main activities covered under MGNREGA in the District
during current financial year 2011-12 (so far) are water
conservation and water harvesting (38.90%), Rajiv Gandhi Seva
Kendra (12.90%), Rural Connectivity(11.5%) etc.
2
Sl.No
Scheme
Discussions
3.1.2
PMGSY
It is mentioned here that as per data available on the website www:ommas.nic.in, total 24 roads works
pertaining to different Phases from II to X have been shown pending whereas as per provisions under the
programme Guidelines, it should have been completed long back. It is mentioned here that last project to the
District were sanctioned of Up-gradation category in 2009-10 under Phase-X which were awarded by them in
May/June, 2010 and as per time frame prescribed in the programme guidelines, the road works should have been
completed by February/March, 2011, however, all the 7 road works sanctioned in Phase-X have been shown
incomplete. In this regard, Superintending Engineer (PWD), apprised that only 12 Road works are pending as on
date and data on OMMAS will be checked and updated shortly and also apprised that due to prolonged rainy
seasons delayed the road works and pending road works are at different stages of construction.
As regards accuracy of data entries on OMMAS, it was observed that the data entered on OMMAS does not
seem accurate as a major difference could be seen between awarded cost and cost of completion etc. For
example, in respect of Package No. RJ27BNUG08, sanctioned cost is Rs.144.14 lakhs, its award cost has been
shown Rs.332.79 lakhs and completion cost has been mentioned as Rs.147.09 lakhs. Further, total award cost in
respect of all projects of the district has been shown as Rs.34,908.84 crore whereas the total sanctioned values of
all the projects sanctioned to Rajasthan State is Rs.9803.26 crore only i.e. the awarded cost of the project
proposals under PMGSY of the District shown on OMMAS is more that the total sanction cost of the State projects.
As per OMMAS data, some of the road works were very delayed for example Package No. RJ27BNUG08
was awarded on 17/10/2007 and completed on June, 2011 i.e. it was completed in 44 months. In this regards,
while discussing the action taken against the contractors for non completion of projects within the time, SE
apprised that deductions were made from their bills as applicable according to Stander Bidding Documents.
3.1.3
Convers
ance
As regards, maintenance of rural roads constructed under PMGSY, Superintending Engineer apprised that
they are facing shortage of funds for maintenance and no funds was provided for maintenance during last financial
year 2010-11 by SRRDA to them which led to poor maintenance of PMGSY roads.
The matter of convergence between MGNERA and PMGSY as envisaged in guidelines issued by this Ministry vide
D.O. No.178/SRD/09-NREGA dated 9/2/2009 i.e. planting trees on PMGSY roads through MGNERA etc. was also
discussed with the District Officers and I was told that no activity has been attempted under convergence.
3
3.1.4
IAY
As per DRDA information, there are 28445 families in Permanent IAY waiting list as on 1/4/2011, Out of
which, 1315 have been target under Indira Awaas Yojana and 7047 families have been target under Chief
Minister BPL Awaas Yojana during the current financial year , 2011-12.
As per information provided by IAY Division, interest accrued on the funds available in DRDA’s IAY
account during last three years is shown as nil whereas the opening balance during last three years was in
crores of Rupees. This issue was also discussed in the review meeting.
As regards, utilization of funds for up-gradation of old houses as per provision under IAY programme
guidelines, I was told that taking into account the huge Permanent IAY waitlist of new Houses and budgetary
constants, at present, they are not granting any assistance for up-gradation under the programme.
It was also mentioned by CEO that they have also started to send a copy of IAY sanctions to the
individual beneficiaries to make transparence and awareness to the beneficiaries. Which seems to be a very
good practice in the District.
3.1.5
NSAP
The issues of less coverage under IGNWPS & IGNDPS, Status of Social Audit in respect of 2010-11,
Annual verification for 2011-12 and operationalization of NSAP-MIS were discussed and information
regarding estimated eligible house holders/individuals under the different components of National Social
Assistance Programme (NSAP) namely Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension scheme(IGNOAPS), Indira
Gandhi National Widow Pension Scheme(IGNEPS), Indira Gandhi National Disability Pension
scheme(IGNDPS), National Family Benefit Scheme and Annapurna and No. of beneficiaries under these
schemes was requested but data were not readily available at the time of discussion. Further, information
regarding social audit and Annual verification was also not readily available.
During the discussion, I also mentioned about the recent decision to lower the age limit for old age
pension from 65 years to 60 years.
3.1.6
SGSY
Discussion about key activities covered under the programme in the district was held and I was told that
the main activity in the district covered under SGSY is dairy. It was also told that they have identify Bank of
Barora for RSETC at the District Hqrs for Training to eligible persons under SGSY. List of key activities and
details of SHGs formed under the programme was not readily available at the time of meeting.
The issue of less expenditure on training of beneficiaries under SGSY than minimum 10% of the total
expenditure was also discussed and I was told that they are making all out effort and arranging training
programme to the beneficiaries through NGOs etc. but due to following reasons expenditure on this
component is less :-
(a) The main activity under the programme is dairy which is traditional in the area and beneficiaries have
good knowledge of the activity and therefore the beneficiaries do not take much interest in training programme
4
(b) the rural beneficiaries facing it were difficult to attend training programme at District Hqrs. due to one or another
reason(s) viz. transport facility, residential programme, etc.
3.1.7
V&MC
Meeting of the Vigilance & Monitoring Committee was held on 1/7/2011 under the Chairmanship of Shri Namo
Narayan Meena, Hon’ble MP(LS) & Minister of State for Finance and discussion on various developmental
programmes/schemes including rural developmental schemes/programmes of this ministry i.e. MGNERA, SGSY,
IAY, PMGSY, PMGSY were held.
After review meeting, I proceed to filed visit. I visited three Blocks, five Gram Panchayats and seven villages in Sawai Madhopur
District in two days time.
3.2
On the fist day 20th October, 2011, I visited Bhadoti and Jhanoon Gram Panchayats of Baunli Block. I was accompanied by BDO,
Sawai Madhopur and Assistant Engineers (MGNREGA), Baunli.
3.2.1
The first Gram Panchayat, I visited was Bhadoti. First, I visited the Gram Panchayat Office where Sarpanch, Secretary and
Rojgar Sahayak of the Gram Panchayat and some villagers were present. I discuss, the implementation issues of the rural developmental
schemes and following observations were made:3.2.1(a) Indira Awaas Yojana
Secretary of the Gram Panchayat was hesitating in providing rural developmental
schemes’ related records/information before me. List of beneficiaries sanctioned IAY dwelling
units during current financial year 2011-12 was shown to me. For tallying the same with
Permanent IAY list was requested. The Secretary of the Gram Panchayat told that permanent
IAY list and list of BPL Census, 2002 have been misplaced. As regards, display of IAY list at
prominent place for citizens, it was observed that it was not displayed at the Panchayat Bhawan
or any other prominent place. I advised his to keep IAY list at Gram Panchayat and to display
the same at a prominent place for citizens of the Gram Panchayat for transparency and public
monitoring in the System.
Secretary told that they not maintained any IAY inventory at Gram Panchayat level. One
person namely Shri Girraj Meena S/o Kalya Meena R/O village Badagaon Kahar, an BPL holder
SWM/2- Bhadoti Gram Panchayat Office bearing No.1017119 made some complaints about working style of the GP.
I also interacted with one IAY beneficiary who told that he has been sanctioned IAY during the current financial 2011-12 and got first
installment of Rs.22,500/- . Construction is at Roof level and 2nd installment is due. He awares about the financial assistance admissible
5
under the scheme as well as amount admissible under Total Sanitations Campaign (TSC), but he does not aware about facility of
borrowing top up loan upto 20,000/- at @4% per annual interest rate under Differential Rate of Interest (DRI) Scheme from any National
Bank, deriving benefit of insurance under Jansree Bima or Aam Admi Bima Yojana and getting membership of SHG etc.
As regarding, discussion on Permanent IAY waitlist in the
Gram Sabha meetings, Secretary mentioned that there is no
formal discussion on the permanent IAY waitlist in the Gram
Sabha meetings.
3.2.1(b) MGNREGA
As regards, social audit the social audit for the period from
Sept.,2010 to March, 2011 was done but the same seems to be
mechanical as there was no shortcoming or pendancy at all.
On that particular day I visited, there was no ongoing work
in the Gram Panchayat. Therefore, close interaction with
MGNREGA workers actually working in the field was not
possible. However, while interacting with the villagers at Bhadoti
Gram Panchayat, it was observed that they aware about the
wage payable under the programme and not made any
complaint regarding late payment of wages under the
programme etc.
SWM/3-Rajiv Gandhi Sawa Kendra, Bhadoti
Thereafter, I visited one path works done under MGNREGA and subsequently also visited Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra constructed
under MGNREGA (see SWM/3). There was no signboard to identify that the work has been carried out under MGNREGA.
6
3.2.1(C) National Social Assistance Programme(NSAP)
As regards, discussion on NSAP in the Gram Sabha
meetings, Secretary told that formally there is no
discussion on the issues of NSAP in the Gram Sabha
meetings, however, if any application received during
Gram Sabha meetings for financial assistance under
NSAP, the same are forwarded to the concerned authority
for appropriate action. They neither keep any formal record
of such applications nor record the same in the Gram
Sabha meetings’ proceeding as informed by Secretary. As
regards, number of beneficiaries under different
components of NSAP, the Secretary mentioned that they
do not maintain any such type of data at Gram Panchayat
level.
One person namely Shri Girraj Meena S/o Kalya
Meena R/O village Badagaon Kahar, an BPL Card holder
bearing No.1017119 also made complaints against the
working system of the GP in NSAP related matters and
told that earlier he was getting pension which has now
been discontinued without any reason.
SWM/4- Interaction with people at Bhadoti
3.2.1(d) SGSY: Secretary of the Gram Panchayat told that there is no SHG in the Gram Panchayat under SGSY.
3.2.1(e) Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadaj Yojanan:one of the pending road works of the district under PMGSY was Package No. RJ27BNUG16 from Bhdoti to Khirani
which was visited by me. The concerned Assistant Engineer, PWD, Bhadoti and BDO, Sawai Madhopur accompanied me. There
were two Signboards fixed at one end of the Road at junction point to Mega Highway at Bhadoti. On one board, name & logo of the
scheme, date of Starting of work(19/5/2010) and expected date of completion(28/1/2011) were mentioned.
7
In the another board relating of quantity of materials and specification of road works etc., only format was printed and no information
was given in it as could be seen from the Photograph (SWM/5).
The expected date of completion has expired long back so I
discussed the same with AEN. He told that approximately 50% works have been
completed so far and the site work is held up since July, 2011. As regards,
reasons of delay in completion of road work, I was told that due to nonavailability of materials and prolonged rainy seasons the works has been
delayed. But both of the reasons do no seem satisfactory as material is easily
available locally as the site is surrounded by Aravali Hills and also situated on a
Mega highway having very good connectivity to the major cities of the Country,
and the area is a low rainfall area as the average rainfall in the District is
697.6mm. Besides, the area is a plain one and having adequate manpower as
population density is 248 persons/sq.km. which is very high than the State
density of 165 persons/sq. km. (2001 Census). Further, it is a up-gradation of
existing Through Route, therefore, there is no matter of availability of land.
Further, generally there is no rain during February, 2011 to June, 2011 and
October onwards in the area and therefore, there are no justifiable reasons for
delaying the project.
SWM/5-Inspection of PMGSY Citizen Information Board
As regards, width of road it seems as per specification of the
programme. A sudden band in road near Khirni village was also observed which
is approximate at right angle. As the road is a through road, the band may
cause accident. Besides, there was also a CD work at the same point and its
safety wall is approx ½ ft high then ground level.
As regards inspection of road works by SQM, AEN told me that
one SQM visited the site on 12/10/2011 but he was not aware about the
findings of the SQM. As per AEN’s information, concerned Executive Engineer
visits the site twice in a month and himself visits the site twice a week. As
regards, action against the contractors on account of delaying the road work,
AEN told that action in such types of cases are decided by the SE however they
inform the status of the road works to them from time to time.
It was observed that some CC works in residential areas and Base
works have been completed. I was told by the AEN that 50% works is
8
completed and payment made is also 50%.
SWM/6- Status of Road (RJ27BNUG16) visited
3.2.2
Thereafter, I visited Block hqrs., Baunli. I was told by the concerned AEN(MGNREGA) that main activities under MGNREGA
in the block are rural connectivity, rain water harvesting etc.
3.2.3
After that I processed to visit Jhanoon Gram
Panchayat accompanying BDO(SWM), AEN(MGNREGA),
Baunli. Secretary of the Gram Panchayat was present at the
Gram Panchayat Office functioning in newly constructed Rajiv
Gandhi Sewa Kendra and it was observed that :-
3.2.3(a)MGNREGA- Social Audit of Jhanoon Gram
Panchayat for the period from October, 2010 to March, 2011
was held on 28/7/2011 and BDO, Baunli attended the social
audit as witness. However, the filling of the Performa, looked
mechanical to me. There were no complaints or no major
issues recorded on. In the social audit there would be
discussions on expenditure and if there was any misuse of
funds, it was required to be refunded. However, no such
situation has arisen. Further, there was no formal discussion on
IAY permanent waiting list and NSAP as per proceedings of the
Gram Sabha meeting. I also discussion the issue with
Secretary who told me that in the Gram Panchayat there are
no formal discussion of NSAP and IAY permanent list in Gram
Sabha meetings and general practice is that if they receive any
SWM/7-Inspection of Records at Baunli Panchayat Samiti Office
application for financial assistance under NSAP in Gram Sabha meetings, the same are examined and sent to the concerned authority if it is
found as per parameters but no formal recording was made in the proceeding of the meeting as per record produced before me.
3.2.3(b) IAY: PBL census, 2002 and permanent IAY waitlist were available but there was two different Permanent waiting list.
Permanent IAY list contain 95 name of BPL householders under SC/ST category and 58 Householders under Other category.
The
9
List of beneficiaries sanctioned financial assistance under IAY during current financial 2011-12 was also show to me. As per the list
7 houses have been sanctioned under IAY and 23 under Chief Minister Awas Yojana in the Gram Panchayat.
No IAY inventory maintained at the Gram Panchayat. I
also visited two houses detailed as under :One of the IAY dwelling Units visited by me belong to
Smt. Pushpa Kawar in Jhanoon village. I was told by
Secretary of Gram Panchayat that it was sanctioned in
2010-11 and it was under construction at Roof level (See
SWM/8).
SWM/8-Under construction IAY at Jhanun village
The beneficiary told that they get Rs.22,500/- as first
installment and second installment is due. Smokeless
Chulha and Sanitary Latrines have not been constructed
in the dwelling unit. As regards, awareness about
financial assistance admissible to them, the beneficiary is
aware about the financial assistance of Rs.45000/- only
and not aware about other assistances like assistance for
sanitary latrines under Total Sanitations Campaign (TSC),
facility of borrowing top up loan upto 20,000/- at @4%
per annual interest rate under Differential Rate of Interest
(DRI) Scheme from any National Bank, deriving benefit of
insurance under Jansree Bima or Aam Admi Bima
Yojana and getting membership of SHG etc. The
undersigned apprised the beneficiary about these
benefits and also advised his to construct smokeless
Chulha.
The other IAY dwelling unit visited by me was in another village Thadi of the Gram Panchayat belongs to smt. Motya W/o Shri
Ramdhan. Secretary of the Gram Panchayat told me that it was sanctioned in 2009-2010 and only 1st installment has been disbursed
to the beneficiary so far and 2nd installment is due. The beneficiary also told that they get only Rs.22,500/- so far.
10
The House was at completion stage (adjoining figure SWM/9), however there was no display board fixed indicating the Rural
Housing logo, year of construction, name of the beneficiary etc. at the dwelling unit as envisaged in the programme guidelines.
Further,
No
smokeless
Chulha
and
sanitary
latrine
were
constructed
in
the
dwelling
unit.
While returning from Thadi village to Baunli, we ride
through a gravel road which connecting Thadi village to
Kodyay-Baunli road near Hanuman Temple. Assistant
Engineer(MGNERA), Baunli told me that the Gravel road has
been constructed under MGNREGA. Potholes/depressions
were observed on the gravel road and it was in a very bad
condition. Further, there was no signboard or indicator to
identify that the gravel road has been constructed under
MGNREGA.
3.2.3(c) PMGSY:
SWM/9-IAY house at Thadi village
On return from Jhanoon , I also discussed the status
of PMGSY in the Block with the AEN(PWD), Baunli at
Panchayat Samiti office, Baunli.
he told that Package
No.RJ27BNUG18, RJ27BNUG19 and RJ27BNUG21 awarded
on 12/5/2010, 19/5/2010 and 12/5/2011 respectively are
delayed by the contractors despite repeated reminder to them.
During the discussion, he also mentioned that the contractors
of Packages No. RJ27BNUG19 and RJ27BNUG21 are least
interested in construction of these road works therefore the contracts of these packages are at termination stage and they will
float tenders for the remaining works of these packages. As regards, action against the Contractors as envisaged under
operational manual, SBD and other relevant rules on account of delaying of the projects and non expediting the works despite
repeated reminders. AEN apprised that levying of liquidated damage on account of delay of projects and other actions as
deemed fit are decided at SE level however they apprised the situation of the projects/packages to SE from time to time.
11
3.3
Bamanwas
Block
On the next day 21st October, 2011, I processed to visit Bamanwas Block of Sawai Madhopur District. I arrived there about 10
AM. I discussed the status of implementation of this Ministry’s rural Developmental schemes in the block with the BDO and other
officials. Inventory of IAY houses is maintained in the prescribed Register at Block level since 2008-09 onwards allotments under
IAY which is a
positive aspect. Besides, a register of
SHGs formed under SGSY was also produced before me
which is also a positive aspect on monitoring of SGSY
activities. As regards, information on action Plan etc. of
MGNREGA, I was informed by BDO that hardcopy of the
same is not available and all information is available in the
Computer and unfortunately power was not there at that
time, so details regarding MGNERA could not be observed.
The documents produced before me were inspected
SWM/10-Discssion at Bamanwas Block
From the inventory it was observed that second
installment of financial Assistance under IAY in most of the
cases for the year 2008-09 have not made so far which
becomes due on construction of dwelling units upto roof
level. As the prescribed time for completion of IAY dwelling
units is within 2 years and therefore IAY dwelling units
sanctioned in 2008-09 should have been completed
however, non of them were paid 2nd installment which is
required to be paid at Roof level of construction. Some of
the cases of cancellation of IAY houses were observed with
the remarks that not in BPL list, already availed benefit,
Cheque return etc.
The BDO apprised that no activity is going on at this time under MGNREGA except construction works of Rajiv Gandhi Sewa
Kendra at some Gram Panchayats and some Social-Forestry activities by PWD at one site.
I was apprised that they benefited 244 individuals and distributed Rs.45 lakhs as CCB to them under SGSY for under taking
different activities under SGSY. As regards, major activities under SGSY in the Block, it was apprised that major activity covered
under the scheme is dairy, tent service, drinking water supply etc.
12
3.3.1(a) PMGSY: The status of PMGSY in the Block was also discussed with the concerned AEN(PWD), Bamanwas at Panchayat Samiti
Office, Bamanwa. I request him to show some PMGSY roads in the block, after my visit to Tehsil Hqrs. But he did not accompany me and
also switch off his Mobile phone. Therefore, I contacted over mobile to the concerned EE(PWD), Gangapur City to depute an official to
show me some PMGSY roads in the Block but no one from PWD department accompany me nor any response received from their side.
3.3.1(b) National Land Record Modernization Programme
For National Land Record Modernization Programme
(NLRMP), I visited Tehsil Hqrs of Bamanwas. I discuss the
progress of the programme with Tehsildar. He apprised that
land records have been uploaded on website upto certain
extent and they have also set up a Computer Cell to
facilitate the citizens to get copy of Jamabandi of their land
etc. Digitization of cadastral maps, scanning & preservation
of old documents etc. have not been done.
3.3.1(c) National Social Assistance Programme (NSAP)
SWM/11- Computer Cell for land record at Bamanwas telsil Hqr.
There was a camp at Bamanwas tehsil hqrs. by the
postman for distribution of financial assistance under NSAP
to beneficiaries of Bamanwas village. I interacted with the
beneficiaries. Most of them were beneficiaries of IGNOAP.
The financial assistance was being distributed through
Money Order for two months @ Rs.500/- per month. The
beneficiaries were of different age group and some of them
were looking 75 years and above old. However, they were
being disbursed the assistance at equal rate of Rs.500/- per
month.
13
I also interacted with the beneficiaries. While interacting with one beneficiary she told her age as 80 years+ and she is getting
financial assistance @ Rs.500/- per month whereas financial assistance as per NSAP guidelines admissible at this age is Rs.1050/- per
month including State share.
Similarly other beneficiaries were looking of different
age group between 60-74 years, 75-79 years and 80 years
and above but they are being paid at the equal rate
@Rs.500/- per month where as per provision under NSAP
IGNOAP, it should be Rs.500/- per month for age group 6074 years, Rs750/- per month for age group between 75-79
years and Rs.1050/- per month for 80 years and above
including State share.
I was told that villagers of other villages of the block
are disbursed the financial assistance in their residence
itself but Bamanwas is a big village and no. of beneficiaries
are very high so it is very difficult to the concerned postman
to disburse the assistance at their residence, therefore,
Postman has decided days for distribution of assistance for
a particular Mohalla on a particular day and so on.
Accordingly the beneficiaries arrive at Tehsil Hqr to collect
the financial assistance under NSAP.
SWM/12-Distribution of financial Assistance under NSAP at Bamanwas
Therefore, there is a needs to review individual cases
of financial assistance taking into accounts their age and
financial assistance at the admissible rate on the basis of
age should automatically be enhanced to the beneficiary.
Further, as could be seen that most of the beneficiaries are very old, the money orders should be delivered at their residence
instead of organizing camps at Tehsil Hqr. for distribution of the financial assistance.
The financial assistance should also be paid on monthly basis instead of bimonthly as envisaged in the programme guidelines.
14
3.3.2 Bairada Gram Panchayat
3.3.2(a) SGSY: Thereafter, I processed to visit Gram Panchayat, Bairada. I was accompanied by BDO and PEO, Bamanwas, but no
technical person was accompanied to me. While going to Bairada gram Panchayat, I visited Vivekanand SHG running a Tent service.
Thereafter I visited another SHG namely
Govardhan SHG at Bad-Mohanpur village, activity of the Group
are Dairy and Water Supply. This group was formed by NGO
M/s. Sahar Public Sansthan, Papadada (Dausa). While
interacting with leader of the group, he told that they are
supplying water to 70 houses of Bad-Mohanpur village and
charge Rs.100 per house towards water supply and their
income has been increased due to the activity. Signboards
containing name of the Group, scheme and activity etc. was
observed at site.
Thereafter, I visited another SHG namely Shridev
Self Helping Group of 10 members headed by a lady.
Signboard containing name of the Group and name of the
scheme etc. was observed. This SHG was also formed by the
same NGO namely M/s. Sahar Public Sansthan, Papadada
(Dausa). One representative of the NGO was also available
there. He told that their NGO has formed 30 SHGs in the
Block. I also discuss, the no. of buffalos with the group and its
marketing facility of milk and milk products, I was told that they
SWM/13-Interation with workers at under Construction Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendrya sell the milk at nearest market. I was told that training to the
SHG members was imparted through M/s. Savitri Samgra Vikas Sansthan. The Bank Pass Book of the SHG was also inspected by me
but there was no much transaction in the account by the Group members and it was observed that it is at dormant stage overall.
3.3.2(b) PMGSY: Thereafter, I visited under construction Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra. Work was going on and four workers were at work. I
interacted with the workers, they not made any complaint about payment of wage etc. Job cards were not available at site and I was told
that by the workers that before ½ hour, Secretary has collected their job cards form them. There was no signboard at site to identify that
15
the work is going on under MGNERA.
Before processing to Bairada Gram Panchayat, BDO informed Secretary of the Gram Panchayat over Mobile to be present at the Gram
Panchayat Office and we arrived GP office after lapse of more that two hours, but when we reached at the Gram Panchayat Office
Secretary was not present there. BDO tried to contract Secretary over Mobile several times but failed due to switch off Mobile. After waiting
for ½ hours, we processed to another Gram Panchayat, Piplai.
3.3.2 (c)PMGSY:
It is mentioned that visit from Piplai to Badh Mohanpur
and back was on PMGSY road bearing Package No. RJ2761 and while riding to the road the following observations
were made:The road was completed in August, 2007 and it is
under 5 year maintenance period. The width of the road
seems to be as per programme specification. Citizen
information Boards contains logo, Name of the Scheme and
Name of the Contractor etc were observed.
While
observing a mile stone (adjoining figure SWM/14) fixed
on the road, it looked never painted before and side solders
were observed damaged and needs maintenance.
3.3.3
SWM/14-PMGSY Road Piplai to Badh Mohanpur
Gram Panchayat, Piplai
3.3.3(a) Indira Awaas Yojana
Next I visited Piplai Gram Panchayat accompanying
BDO and PEO. Gram Panchayat Secretary was present
there.
He was hesitating in producing the relevant
information/documents before me and he hardly produce
before me PBL List 2002, IAY permanent wait list and list of
beneficiaries granted assistance under IAY during current financial year 2011-12. No other records in respect of other schemes were
made available to me with the remark that records has been kept away due to cleaning of panchayat Office on account of Deepawali
festival. As regards discussion on Permanent IAY waitlist in the Gram Sabha Meetings, I was told by Gram Panchayat Secretary that no
format discussion on permanent IAY waitlist are held in the Gram Sabha meetings.
Thereafter, I visited two IAY houses belongs to Shri Mahesh S/o Mulya Nath which was under construction. Secretary told, in
presence of son of the beneficiary, that the IAY has been sanctioned during current financial year, 2011-12 and 1st installment has been
16
released to the beneficiary.
Thereafter, I visited another IAY house belongs to Smt. Jummi w/o Raheem which was completed and old one. Secretary
told that it was sanctioned in 2008-09 and at that time financial assistance admissible was Rs. 35000/- which has been disbursed to
the beneficiary. It was observed that signboard containing logo & name of scheme was not available at the IAY dwelling Unit. Neither
smokeless
chulha
nor
sanitary
latrine
was
constructed
in
the
dwelling
unit.
3.3.3(b) MGNERA
Documents/information/records viz. Register of social Audit and Gram
Sabha meetings in respect of MGNREGA were not made available before me
with the remarks by Gram Panchayat Secretary that records have been keep
away and not feasible to made available for inspection . Secretary also told that
Social Audit for the six monthly period ending on 31/3/2011 have been conducted
which was attended by BDO as witness.
SWM/15-IAY house belongs to smt. Jummi
3.3.3(c)NSAP
As regards discussion on NSAP issues in the Gram Sabha Meetings, I was
told by Gram Panchayat Secretary that no format discussion on NSAP are held in
the Gram Sabha meetings. He further mentioned that there was a Camp in the
Gram Panchayat some time before and all the applications relating to financial
assistance under NSAP received to them during the Camp were disposed off and
eligible were sanctioned in the camp itself by the concerned Authority. Further, I
was also told that annual verification of the pensioners for the period 2010-11 has
been completed.
While visiting the IAY Dwelling belong to Smt. Jummi, her husband Shri
Raheem requested for financial assistance under IGOAPS. He was looking more
than 60 years as could be seen from photo SWM/16 and also BPL household. In
this regard, Gram Panchayat Secretary told me that they have not received any
application from him. I advised BDO and Secretary to kindly look into such type of
cases and take necessary action as per parameters of NSAP.
SWM/16- Shri Raheem who requested
for financial assistance under IGNOAP
17
3.3.4 Pachayat Dabar:
Thereafter I processed to visit another Gram Panchayat Dabar. BDO and PEO of the Block was accompanied to me. Secretary of
the gram Panchayat and some other persons were available at the Gram Panchayat Office. Secretary was hesitating in producing the
relevant information/documents before me and told me that due to Deepawali festival, the record of the Gram Panchayat is laying
here and there and it is not feasible him to made available the records before
me. He also apprised me that no work is going on under MGNREGA in the
Gram Panchayat. I also interacted with some persons available there about
wages etc. under MGNRERA and they are aware about the wage rate payable
under the programme.
3.4 Block: Gangapur City
3.4.1 PMGSY
SWM/17-PMGSY Road (Package No.RJ27BNUG05
Thereafter, I visited one road work package No. RJ27BNUG05- A/R to
Gawari at Gangapur City sanctioned in the year 2007-08. One Signboard
containing information about name of the scheme, logo etc. was observed at
one of its end point at Gangapur City and there was no signboard regarding
quantity and specification of road work. As per information observed from the
Signboard the work started on 15/1/2007 and completed on 14/8/2008 having
length 8.4 km cost Rs.178 lakhs. Whereas as per information on OMMAS, the
year of sanction is 2007-08, length is 8.50 km , cost Rs.179.36 lakhs and date
of completion as July, 2011. Therefore the data given on the sign board does
not tally with the data given on the OMMAS.
It is a Up-gradation work. The width of the road seems to be as per
PMGSY norms. But the condition of the road was not good and cracking,
depression, potholes on the road were observed as could be seen from the
photographs. Further, the conditions of the roads solders were not good and it
appears that it is not being maintained properly .
Therefore, it is advisable that NQM may be deputed to inspect the road
and submit report to this Ministry. Further, reasons for various in data Given on
OMMAS and on the signboard may also be sought from SRRDA.
SWM/18-PMGSY Road (Package No.RJ27BNUG05
18
4.
Field Visit in Tonk District
4.1 Review Meeting :
A Review Meeting with the concerned officers was held at District Hqrs. on 22 nd October, 2011 at 11.45 AM to 12.45 PM at
District Hqr Tonk. The following officers/Officials were present in the review Meeting:1.
Shri L. R. Gugarwal , CEO, Zilla Parisad, Tonk
2.
Shri G. C. Panwar, Superintending Engineer , PWD, Tonk
3.
Shri Sukhlal Meena, Executive Engineer, ZP, Tonk
4.
Shri D. K. Gupta, Executive Engineer, PWD, Malpura
5.
Shri H. L. Meena, Executive Engineer, PWD, Tonk
6.
Shri J.K. Mishra, Executive Engineer, PWD, Tonk
7.
Shri S. K. Saxena, Executive Engineer, PHED, Tonk
8.
Kailash Chand Meena, BDO, Uniara
9.
Shri C. L. Bunker, Assistant Engineer, PWD
10. Shri Rajendra Joshi, Assistant Engineer, PWD, Tonk
TNK/1-Meeting at Tonk with District Officials
11. Shri G. S. Meena, P.O. (SGSY), Zill Parisad, Tonk
12. Shri Mahesh Joshi, A.P.O. (SE) Zilla Parisad, Tonk
Details discussion on the status of implementation of the various rural developmental schemes of this Ministry in Tonk district
was held. The issues intimated by the Programme Divisions were also discussed. The point emerged during the discussion are
elaborate in brief scheme-wise as under:-
19
Sl.No.
4.1.1
Scheme
Discussions
MGNREGA
Tonk is a Phase-II MGNREGA District. DRDA implements the MGNREGA programme in the District. The
total rural householders in the districts is 260030 . Employment created under the programme during the current
financial year 2011-12 (Upto 21/10/2011) was 20.02 lakhs mandays .
The opening balance as on 1/4/2011 was Rs. 48.06 crore. Against which utilization till first half of the
financial year was approximately Rs. 19.38crore which is 40% of the available funds and 22% of the financial target
for the year 2011-12. In this regards, I was told that financial progress has been adversely affected by the following
factors : the scheme is demand drawn and there was less demand for employment under the programme due to good rain
during monsoon season since last year; and
due to hike in wage rate in open market than the wage paid under MGNERA, people prefer to other private works
instead MGNERA works.
4.1.2
PMGSY
It is mentioned here that as per data available on the website www:ommas.nic.in, only two road works, each
one of Phase-VII (2007-08) and Phase IX(2009-10) have been shown pending which should have been completed
long back as per PMGSY Programme Guidelines. During the discussion on the matter, SE(PWD), Tonk apprised
that the originally sanctioned work in respect of the Phase-VII road work has been completed long back but some
additional work has been sanctioned which is going on and therefore the road has been indicated as pending. The
other road work of Phase-IX has been completed.
As regards, maintenance of PMGSY roads, SE(PMGSY) apprised that they have started repairing of roads
after stopping of rainy season.
4.1.3
Conver
gance
The matter of convergence between MGNERA and PMGSY as envisaged in guidelines issued by this Ministry vide
D.O. No.178/SRD/09-NREGA dated 9/2/2009 i.e. planting trees on PMGSY roads through MGNERA etc. was also
discuss with the District Officers and I was told that no activity has been attempted under convergence.
20
4.1.4
IAY
As per DRDA information, there are 23725 families in Permanent IAY waiting list as on 1/4/2011, Out
of which, 906 have been target under IAY and 4099 families have been target under Chief Minister BPL Awaas
Yojana during the current financial year , 2011-12.
As per information provided by IAY Division, interest accrued during last three years on the funds
available in DRDA’s account is shown as nil whereas the opening balance during last three years was in
crores of Rupees. This issue was also discussed in the meeting.
4.1.5
NSAP
The issues of less coverage under IGNWPS and IGNDPS, Status of Social Audit is respect of 2010-11,
Annual verification for 2011-12 and operationalisation of NSAP-MIS were discussed and information
regarding estimated eligible house holders/persons under the different components of National Social
Assistance Programme (NSAP) namely Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension scheme(IGNOAPS), Indira
Gandhi National Widow Pension Scheme(IGNEPS), Indira Gandhi National Disability Pension
scheme(IGNDPS), National Family Benefit Scheme and Annapurna and No. of beneficiaries under these
schemes were requested but data were not readily available at the time of discussion. Further, no
information regarding social audit and Annual verification was also not readily available.
During the discussion, I also mentioned about the recent decision to lower the age limit for old age
pension from 65 years to 60 years under IGNOAP.
4.1.6
SGSY
Discussion about activities covered under the programme in the district was held and I was told that
the main activity in the district under SGSY is dairy. List of key activities and details of SHGs formed under the
programme was not readily available at the time of discussion.
The issues of less expenditure than minimum 10% of the total expenditure on training of beneficiaries
was also discussed and I was told that they are arranging training to the beneficiaries through NGO etc but as
the main activity under the programme is dairy which is traditional in the area and beneficiaries have
adequate knowledge of the activity therefore they take least interest in the training programme.
4.1.7
V&MC
Meeting of the Vigilance & Monitoring Committee were held on 09/2/2011 and 04/7/2011 under the
Chairmanship of Shri Namo Narayan Meena, Hon’ble MP(LS) & Minister of State for Finance and discussion
on various developmental programmes/schemes including rural developmental schemes/programmes of this
ministry i.e. MGNERA, SGSY, IAY, PMGSY, PMGSY were held and various remedial measures have been
emerged during the meeting .
21
After review meeting , I proceed to filed visit. I visited two blocks, four Gram Panchayats and five villages in Tonk District in two
days time.
4.2
On 22nd October, 2011, I visited Sohela and Baroni Gram Panchayats of Tonk Block. I was accompanied by Executive
Engineer, ZP, Tonk and APO(ZP), Tonk.
4.2.1
The first Gram Panchayat, I visited in Tonk Block was
Sohela. First, I visited the Gram Panchayat Office where Secretary of
the Gram Panchayat and some villagers were present. I discussed the
implementation issues of the schemes and also inspected the related
documents
and
made
the
following
observations:4.2.1(a) NSAP
As regarding, discussion on NSAP in the Gram Sabha
meetings, Secretary mentioned that formally there is no discussion on
the issues relating to NSAP in the Gram Sabha meetings, however any
application received during the meeting for pension is forwarded to the
concerned authority. However, they not keep any record on the same.
As regards, number of beneficiaries under different components of
NSAP, the Secretary mentioned that they do not maintain any such
type of data at Gram Panchayat level.
TNK/2- Gram Panchayat Office, Sohela
4.2.1(b) MGNREGA
I also interacted with one Indira Gandhi National Widow
Pensioner at Gram Panchayat office namely Smt. Kajodi w/o late Shri
Amba Lal Gujjar. She mentioned that she is getting financial assistance
@ Rs.400/- per month but she is getting the same consolidated for 5-6
months at a time and not on monthly basis. .
As regards social audit, the social audit for the last six month was held on 11/8/2011. As per proceedings of the Gram
Sabha meeting, approximately 250 persons participated in the Gram Sabha meeting but the same seems to be mechanical as there
was no shortcoming or pendancy at all.
22
While interacting with the village people, they did not made any complaint regarding late payment. I was told that payment of wages to workers
under MGNREGA in the Gram Panchayat are made through Bank. Neither any compliant nor any instance of delay were observed while
inspecting the records.
There was no ongoing work under MGNREGA except construction
of Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra at Sohela. I visited the same and also
interacted with the works at site. There were three persons on job.
Muster roll was maintained and available on site but Job cards were
not available with the workers and I was told by the workers that the
same is with the Rojgar Sahayak.
Further, there was no signboard to identify that the work has been
carrying out under MGNREGA as envisaged in the programme
guidelines. Persons work under MGNERA, aware about the wage rate
payable under the programme.
TNK/3-Rajiv Gandhi Sawa Kendra, Sohela(Under Construction)
4.2.1(c) IAY
List of beneficiaries sanctioned IAY dwelling units during current
financial year 2011-12, Permanent IAY waiting list, BPL census 2002
list were made available by Secretary before me and it was observed
that the IAY wait list is to be based on the BLP Census 2002 and the
lowest scored person has been kept at top of the permanent wait list.
The selection of beneficiary for the current financial appeared from the Permanent IAY waitlist. Mode of disbursement of financial
assistant under IAY is Post office. However, the permanent wait list was not displayed at any prominent place in the Gram Panchayat for
people. I advised GP Secretary to display the Permanent IAY waitlist at prominent place for citizens either at the Panchayat Bhawan or any
other prominent place. No IAY inventory mentioned at Panchayat level.
As regarding, discussion on permanent IAY waitlist in the Gram Sabha meetings, Secretary told that there is no formal
discussion on the issue in the Gram Sabha meetings of the Gram Panchayat.
IAY beneficiary aware about the financial assistance of Rs.45000/- and Rs.32000/- towards Sanitation but they not aware about
top up loan upto Rs.20,000/- at subsidies rate of 4% per Annam.
23
IAY Houses visited at Sohela
Tonk/4- IAY Dwelling unit of . Smt. Sanno W/o Nasrudden Khan
Tonk/5- IAY Dwelling unit of Smt. SakilaW/O Banna Khan
Thereafter, I Visited two IAY dwelling units bellowing to Smt. Sanno W/o Nasrudden Khan and Smt. SakilaW/O Banna Khan.
Both the IAY dwelling were at completed stage. Both the dwelling units have Logo, name of the scheme and Year and amount of sanction
were displayed on both the Dwelling Units. Sanitary latrine was also constructed at one dwelling unit belong to Smt. Sakila w/o Banna
Khan. Both the Dwelling units were electricity fitted. I was told that IAY beneficiaries are assisted for electricity connectivity under RGGVY.
But smokeless Chulha has not been constructed at both the IAY dwelling units. As regards, awareness about financial
assistance admissible to them, the beneficiary is aware about the financial assistance admissible for construction of IAY dwelling but not
aware about facility of borrowing top up loan upto 20,000/- at @4% per annual interest rate under Differential Rate of Interest (DRI)
Scheme from any National Bank, deriving benefit of insurance under Janshri Bima Yojana.
24
4.2.1(d) PMGSY: Thereafter I processed to visit another village of Sohela Gram Panchayat namely Jabadiya. While going to Jabadiya
Village, I visited one PMGSY Road package No.RJ-31-50 from Sohela-Diggi Road to Jabadiya . As per details on signboard, the work of
the road was started on 29/9/2006 and completed on 28.5.2007 , the road is under 5 year maintenance period. While visiting the road, the
following observations were made :
Only one signboard were fixed indicating logo & name of PMGSY,
Date of starting and date of completion etc. and no signboard about
quantity and specification of road work was fixed at one end of the
road at junction point to Sohela-Diggi Road.

The condition of the road was very bad and not maintained properly .

One CD work was there approximately 500 meter from the junction
point and it was observed that cause-way has been constructed
whereas as per site requirement , Cross Drainage should be
constructed. I was told that during rainy days the road covered with
rain water which has adversely damaged the road.
4.2.1(e) SGSY :
TNK/6- PMGSY Road Package No. 3150
TNK/7- Interaction with SHG’s members
Secretary of the Gram Panchayat told that two SHGs have been
formed by an NGO out of which one Group is functional. The Gram
Panchayat not form any group nor involved in monitoring of SGSY
groups/beneficiaries. I visited one of the group namely M/s. Santosh
Self Helping Group involved in Dairy by Buffalos raring. The group is
of 10 ladies. I was told that Training was organized by Jaipur TV
Training Centre at the village level in dairy. I interacted with four
women of the group about activities carried out by their group, they
told that they got assistance for purchase of buffalos. About
marketing of milk and milk products, they told that they use the mild
and milk products domestically and not sold anywhere. About the
training the beneficiary told that because cattle nurture is their
traditional activity and they do not need any training for the same.
The Pass Book of the Group was also produced before me where no
much transaction were reflected. Overall the status of the SHG is
dormant.
25
4.2.2
Thereafter, I visited Gram Panchayat , Baroni accompanying EE, ZP, Tonk and ACEO, ZP, Tonk.
4.2.2(a) PMGSY: PMGSY road package No. RJ-31-BN-UG-19- Baroni to Siras which was sanction under Phase-VII (2007-08) was visited
by the me. The concerned Assistant Engineer, PWD, Executive
Engineer (MGNERA) and ACEO, Zilla Parisad, Tonk accompanied
to me. The road work was started on 14/10/2007 and is still
incomplete as per OMMAS. It was on of the two pending roads of
the district indicated as pending on OMMAS . I discussed the
matter with AEN, he told that the sanctioned work has been
completed long back on16/6/2008 but the sanction amount for the
road works was Rs.312.39 lakhs and expenditure on road work was
Rs.297.93 lakhs therefore there was a saving of Rs.14.46 lakhs.
Therefore, they awarded an additional works of 200 mtr both side
drain work to provide drain for disposal of house drainage of nearby
habitation with junction of NH-12 on 23/9/2011 at the cost of
TNK/8
TNK/9
Rs.8.44 lakhs. As the additional work is going on, the road has
been indicated as under construction on OMMAS whereas the
sanctioned work has already been completed.
As per information provided, the road was inspected by SQMs at
different Stages of constructions. While inspecting the road, the
following observations were made:


TNK/10
TNK/11
TNK/8-11- PMGSY Road Baroni to Siras (Package No.RJ-31-BNUG19
The roads shows potholes, cracking, depressions in the
pavement (see TNK/8-11);
Vegetations growth on the berms has not been cleared, rain
cuts not repaired,
Perhaps, the additional on going work is in addition to the work
sanctioned by the ministry and therefore savings under PMGSY
funds may not be utilized for this work without approval of this
ministry.
Thereafter we went to Gram Panchayat office situated in Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra’s building. Secretary of the Gram Panchayat was
present there. I discuss, the implementation issues of the schemes and made the following observations :26
4.2.2(b) IAY
List of beneficiaries sanctioned IAY dwelling units during current financial year 2011-12 was shown to me. For tallying the same
to Permanent IAY list for IAY was requested. Secretary of the Gram Panchayat told that he has been recently transferred to the Gram
Panchayat and his predecessor had not handed over the same to him. Display of IAY list
at prominent place for citizens could not be expected as the list was not even available in
the Gram Panchayat Office. No IAY inventory mentioned at Panchayat level. I advised him
to obtain the list from the Block office/ZP and made available it for the people of the Gram
Panchayat As per proceeding of Gram Sabha meeting held on 04/8/2011, there was no
formal discussion on IAY permanent IAY waitlist.
4.2.2© SGSY: Secretary told me that there is no SHG under SGSY in the Gram
Panchayat as on date.
4.2.2(d) MGNREGA: I was told that due to Deepawali festival no work is going on under
MGNREGA programme as on date in the Gram Panchayat.
Social Audit in respect of preceding six monthly period was held on 04/8/2011 and
ACEO, Tonk signed as witness of Social Audit. However, the filling of the proforma,
looked mechanical to me. There were no complaints or no major issues recorded on.
Further, it was also observed from the register in which proceeding of social Audit was
recorded that there was signature of approximately 50-60 persons only and in this
regards, Secretary told me that conducting of social audit is very difficult for them because
people do not participate in the Gram Sabha Meeting. In the social audit there would be
discussions on expenditure and if there was any misuse of funds, it was required to be
refunded. However, no such situation has arisen.
4.2.2(E) NSAP: There was no mention about NSAP in the proceeding of last Gram
Sabha meeting held on 04/8/2011. I was told by Gram Panchayat Secretary that there are
no formal discussion in Gram Sabha meetings on NSAP however if any application
TNK/12-13 Gram Panchayat Baroni
Receive during the Gram Sabha meetings for assistance under NSAP, the same is examined and sent to the concerned authority if it is as
per parameters but there was no formal recording in this regard in the proceeding of the meeting as per record produced before me.
27
4.3
Uniara Block
On the last day of visit i.e. 23rd October, 2011, I visited Uniara Block of Tonk District. I visited two Gram Panchayats of the Block. First, I
visited Gothada Gram Panchayat . I was accompanied by EE( ZP), Tonk, ACEO, Tonk and BDO, Uniara Block. Secretary of the Gram
Panchayat and some villagers were present there. I discussed, the implementation status of the schemes and made the following observations
4.3.1(a) MGNREGA
• I was told that due to Deepawali festival, no work is going on under MGNREGA programme
as on date except Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra.
• Assets Register under the programme maintained in the Gram Panchayat was produced
before me.
TNK/14- Gram Panchayat Gothada
• Social Audit in respect for the period from 1/3/2011 to 31/8/2011 was held on 09/9/2001 and
Accounts Officer, attended the social audit as witness. However, the filling of the proforma,
looked mechanical to me. There were no complaints or no major issues recorded on. Further,
it was also observed from the register in which proceeding of social Audit was recorded that
there was signature of approximately 50-60 persons only in the Gram Sabha meeting
proceedings register and in this regard, Secretary told me that conduction of social audit is
very difficult for them because people do not participate in the Gram Sabha Meetings. In the
social audit there would be discussions on expenditure and if there was any misuse of funds,
it was required to be refunded. However, no such situation has arisen.
• I also visited, under construction Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra at Gothada and interacted with
the workers at site. Muster roll was not available at site and it was told that Assistant Rojgar
Sahayak has took the same for updating.
• Main activities covered under the programme is rural connectivity and water conservation.
TNK/15- Under Construction Rajiv Gandhi Sewa
Kendra , Gothada- Interaction with workers
28
4.3.1(b) IAY: List of beneficiaries sanctioned IAY dwelling units during current financial year 2011-12, Permanent IAY waitlist , BPL Sensus
2002 list etc. were shown to me. As regard display of IAY list at prominent place for citizens, it was observed that it was not displayed were
not displayed at the Panchayat Bhawan or any other prominent place. No IAY inventory mentioned at the Gram Panchayat level.
• There was no formal discussion on IAY permanent waiting list in the Gram Sabha
meeting held on 9/9/2011 and in this regard, I was told by the Secretary that no
discussion on Permanent IAY list is held in the Gram Sabh meetings .
• I also visited two IAY houses belong to Smt. Bhuli W/o Bisana and Shri Nanda S/o
Shri Ram Chandra which were sanctioned during the year 2010-11 and full payment
has been disbursed to them. The houses were electricity fitted but no sanitary latrine
and smokeless Chulha were observed at both the houses.
• IAY beneficiary aware about the financial assistance admissible under the
programme but they not aware about top up loan upto Rs.20,000/- at subsidies rate
of 4% per annam and Bima Yojana.
TNK/16-Interaction with IAY beneficiary at Gothada village
4.3.1© NSAP:
There was no mentioned in the proceeding of last Gram Sabha meeting held on
9/9/2011 about NSAP. I was told by Gram Panchayat Secretary that there are no
formal discussion on NSAP in Gram Sabha meetings however if any application
received during the Gram Sabha meetings for pension etc., the same are examined
and sent to the concerned authority if it is found as per parameters and they do not
maintain any record in this regard .
I also interacted with two NSAP beneficiaries namely Shri Mewaram and Shri
Kishan. They told that they are about 70 years old and they are getting financial
assistance of Rs.500/- per month through Post Office.
4.3.1(d) SGSY:
The secretary told me that SHGs under SGSY in the Gram Panchayat are
formulated by NGOs directly without any intimation to the Gram Panchayat.
TNK/17-Interaction with NSAP beneficiaries at Gothada village
29
4.3.2.PMGSY: Thereafter I proceeded to visit a PMGSY road Package No. RJ-31-58 – Tonk SWM Road to Khedli (Phase-VI). The Road was
completed in May, 2008 and it is under 5 years maintenance period. I was accompanied by EE( ZP), Tonk, ACEO, Tonk, EE(PWD), Tonk,
BDO, Uniara Block and the concerned AEN(PWD).
While visited the road, following observations were made:•
•
•
•
TNK/18
Citizen information Boards contains logo, Name of the Scheme and
Name of the Contractor etc were observed.
However, information in the other board relating to quantity and
specification of road works was observed incomplete as could be
seen from the Photographs (TNK/18).
Further, there are two-three turns/bends on the roads and it
appears that vegetations have not been cleared for a very long
period which could led to an accident.
Lack of road infrastructure to indicate sudden turns/bends was
observed, as could be seen from TNK/20.
TNK/19
4.3.3 (a) DPAP –Hariyal project at Soltpur -9/3-2006-07
Some water harvesting activities under DPAP Hariyali project were
also visited at Solatpura village area. Where a pukka wall across a rain
water drain was constructed and various land boundaries of soil were
also made on farms. EE(ZP) told that these activities have been
carried out under DPAP Hariyali project and it has increased water
level in nearby wells. There was no sign board or any indicated to
identify that the works have been carried out under DPAP Hariyali
project.
4.3.3(b) PMGSY:
TNK/20
TNK/18-20: PMGSY Road Package No. RJ31-58
While going to visit DPAP-Hariyali Project at Soltpur, we ride over
another PMGSY road package No. RJ31BNUG13 NH-116 from NH-16
to Sop Amli Road . Citizen Information Boards were observed at its
one end at junction point at NH-16 and as per information on the sign
30
TNK/22
TNK/21
TNK/24
TNK/25
TNK/23
TNK/26
TNK/21-26- PMGSY Road Package No. RJ31BNUG13
boards, the road was started on 23/11/2007 and completed on 22/8/2009 and length as 13.20 km. No vegetation on both side of the
road were observed and the width was also seem as per provision. However, the conditions of the road was not good as could be
seen from the above photographs (TNK/21-26). At one point approximately 500-750 meter away from NH-16 junction point, it was
observed that rain water flows over the road during rainy season resultantly damaging the road (See TNK/22) badly and there is a
need of culverts. The roads shows potholes, cracking, depressions in the pavement The maintenance Conditions of the road was very
poor and prime-facio the road quality was not looking good. Therefore, it is advisable that the quality of the road should be enquired
through NQM.
31
4.3.4
Next I visited, Khohalya Gram Panchayat of Uniara Block. I was accomplice by EE, ZP, Tonk, ACEO, Tonk and BDO, Uniara
Block. Secretary, Sarpanch and some villagers of the Gram Panchayat were present there. I discussed, the implementation issues of the
rural developmental schemes and following observations were made:4.3.4(a): MGNREGA
• I was told that due to Deepawali festival no work
is going on under MGNREGA programme as on
date in the Gram Panchayat.
TNK/27
TNK/28
TNK 27-28: Gravel Road – Surali Road to Canal (GP-Khohalya)
• Social Audit for the period from 1/3/2011 to
31/8/2011 was held on 09/9/2001 and Accounts
Officer signed as witness of Social Audit.
However, the filling of the Performa, looked
mechanical to me. There were no complaints or
no major issues recorded on. In this regards,
the Secretary told me that conduction of social
audit is very difficult for them because people do
not participate in the Gram Sabha Meeting. In
the social audit there would be discussions on
expenditure and if there was any misuse of
funds, it was required to be refunded.
However, no such situation has arisen.
Main activities covered under the programme is
rural connectivity and water conservation.
• I was told that payment of wages under the
programme
is made through post office
accounts.
TNK/29
TNK/30
TNK 29-30: Gravel Road in Barundan village (Khohalya GP)
I also visited, two gravel roads constructed
under MGNREGA. It was observed that
there was no signboard or indicator to identify
that the work has been carried out under
MGNREGA at both the gravel road works.
32
While visit the gravel road at Barundan Village (see TNK/29-30), one lady came to us and told that due to this gravel road, rain water was
blocked into their houses during the last monsoon season and they had no option except to cut the road and therefore they made a cutting
on the gravel road to drain the rain water from their houses which was also show to us. The Gravel road was seems of good width but it was
not
constricted
at
a
point
due
to
land
dispute.
Both the gravel roads bear different specifications in terms of width, base work, thickness of gravel etc. as width, thickness etc. of the road
(see TNK 27-28) Surali Road to Canal was less in comparison to the other gravel road (see TNK 29-30): at Barundan village.
4.3.4(b) NSAP: There was no mention in the proceeding of last Gram Sabha meeting
held on 9/9/2011 about discussion on NSAP. I was told by GP Secretary that there are
no formal discussion on NSAP in Gram Sabha meetings however if any application
received during the Gram Sabha meetings for pension etc., the same are examined
and sent to the concerned authority if it is found as per parameters and they do not
maintain
any
record
in
this
regard
.
4.3.1(c) SGSY: The secretary told me that SHGs under SGSY in the Gram Panchayat
are formulated by NGOs directly without any intimation to the Gram Panchayat.
4.3.1(d) IAY: List of beneficiaries sanctioned IAY dwelling units during current financial
year 2011-12, Permanent IAY waitlist , BPL Census 2002 list etc. were shown to me.
As regards, display of IAY list at prominent place for citizens, it was observed that it
was not displayed at the Panchayat Bhawan or any other prominent place. No IAY
inventory mentioned at Panchayat level.
TNK/31-under construction IAY
Similar to other Gram Panchayats, there was no mention about discussion on IAY permanent waiting list in the Gram Sabha meeting held
on 9/9/2011 and I was told by the Secretary that generally there are no discussion on Permanent IAY list in the Gram Sabh meetings .
I also visited three IAY houses belong to Smt. Sampat W/o Shri Sibbu Moji, Shri Shyokaran Gurjar S/o Shri Kalyan Gurjar and Smt.
Santra W/o Shri Ram bilash. I was told that these IAY were sanctioned in 2010-11. Out of these three houses, first two IAY were under
construction and the third one was complete. The first two beneficiaries were disbursed 1st installment of the financial assistance and the
third one has been disbursed full amount admissible under IAY. Logo, name of the scheme etc. were not available at the completed house.
IAY beneficiary aware about the financial assistance admissible under the programme but they not aware about top up loan upto
Rs.20,000/- at subsidies rate of 4% per annam and bima Yojana etc.
After that, I processed to Uniara Block Hqrs. Where I discussed the other implementation issues in the block with the BDO and
thereafter, I proceed back to Delhi and Arrived at Delhi on 24/10/2011 in the morning.
33
5
Conclusions and suggestions:-
First of all, I am very thankful to the State Government as well as the District Authorities for their good co-operation to facilitate field
visit to see the implementation of the schemes of this ministry. Overall the implementation of the rural developmental schemes of the Ministry
of Rural Development in the area visited seems satisfactory and running of CM BPL Awaas Yojana simultaneously to IAY would improve the
situation of the huge permanent IAY waitlist in the State. Endorsing copy of the IAY sanction to the beneficiaries, construction of Rajiv Gandhi
Sewa Kendra under MGNREGA, disbursement of wages under MGNREGA through Bank and Post Office etc. are good practices in the area
visited. However, on the basis of observations made and feedback received during the filed visit, the following submission are made for
making the the implementation of the rural developmental Schemes of this ministry more transparent, public monitoring & accountable and
useful by way of proper addressing of the following issues:5.1 Indira Awaas Yojana:
As two similar schemes i.e. IAY and Chief Ministry Awaas
Yojana have been implementing in the State simultaneously and
beneficiaries are selected from the same permanent IAY waitlist under
both the schemes. For smooth implementation and better monitoring, it
would be appropriate to maintain an inventory of IAY beneficiaries
which may assist a lot in monitoring of these schemes, therefore the
provision of maintaining of IAY inventory should be strictly adhered to.
It was also observed that in respect of some beneficiaries, IAY
sanctions were canceled at latter stage as could be seen from figure
SWM/19, however reasons for cancelation were not reflected in the
record. I was told that it was due to different reasons viz. repetition of
same beneficiary, non having account of the beneficiary etc. There
should be solid reason for cancelation of any sanction or bypassing of
an individual while selection and the reasons need to be recorded in
the inventory/permanent IAY waitlist and may also be intimated to the
individual concern as far as possible.
5/1- IAY Inventory Register
Further, the provision of printing the logo, name of the scheme,
name of beneficiary, year of sanction etc. at IAY houses should also be
complied with invariably .
It was observed that the beneficiaries under IAY do not aware about facility of top up loan upto Rs.20,000/- under the differential Rate
of Interest (DRI Scheme) from any Nationalized Bank at an interest rate of 4% per annum. The PRIs may aware the beneficiaries about this
34
facilities to the beneficiaries.
Status of disbursement of 2nd installment in respect of IAY houses sanctioned during pervious to preceding years may be reviewed in the first
quarter of that financial year. Permanent IAY waitlist should be displayed at prominent places and be also made handy to people at Gram
Panchayat Office as well.
Formal discussion on permanent IAY waitlist in the Gram
Sabha meetings and recording of the same in the Gram Sabha
meetings’
proceedings
may
be
accentuated
.
Besides, issues/observations(As per Index) emerged
during filed visit may also be looked into by the programme
division.
5.2 Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY):-
5/2- Citizen Information Board - incomplete information
5.2.1Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana is known for its quality
and time. Rajasthan is a plane State having distinct long dry
season and well connected with major cities of the country
which are suitable for road works. However, many road works
in the area visited are delayed, such types of delay diplomacy
of the contractors in completion of road works under the
programme without any justifiable reason should be taken
seriously and necessary deterrent action in the cases of
negligence by the PIUs/contractors needs to be taken.
Therefore, all the cases of pending road works need to be
reviewed by SRRDA and appropriate action may be taken and
Action taken report may be submitted to this Ministry.
5.2.2For transparency and involving the local public in the
implementation of the programme by way of provide
information to them through Citizen Information Boards at both end of PMGSY roads has been envisaged in the programme guidelines.
However, during field visit, it was observed that information on signboards was incomplete as could be seen from adjoining figure 5/2.
Therefore, signboards and complete information on signboards as predicted in the Programme guidelines needs to be ensured by the PIUs.
5.2.3
OMMAS is an important device for monitoring, accountability, transparency in implementation of the programme and it is also
made information accessible to local public and therefore, the data uploaded on OMMAS need to be checked, accurate and updated from time
to time as envisaged under programme guidelines.
35
5.2.4 It is recommended that the roads Piplai to Badh Mohanpur (Package No. RJ2761), Road works from A/R Gangapur City to
Gawari (RJ27BNUG05), Road works from from Sohela-Diggi Road to Jabadiya (package No.RJ31-50), road work from Baroni to Siras
(Package No.RJ-31-BN-UG-19), road work from Tonk Sawai Madhopur Road to Khedli (RJ31-58) and road work from NH-16 to Sop Amli
road (package No. RJ31BNUG13) under complete category and road work from Bhadoti to Khirni (package No. No. RJ27BNUG16)
under
ongoing
category
may
be
inspected
through
National
Quality
Cordinations
(NQMs).
5.2.5 Maintenance of rural road is the responsibility of the State and
therefore, release of programme funds under the programme has been
made contingent upon deposit of maintenance funds by the state into
SRRDA’s maintenance funds account since October, 2010.
Accordingly, the State Government deposited an amount of Rs. 17
crore into maintenance funds account of SRRDA for the year 2010-11.
However, during the field visit, I was told by one PIU that they roads
are not being maintained properly due to shortage of funds at PIU
level. Therefore, SRRDA may look into the matter and take necessary
action to ensure adequate funds
availability with PIUs under
Maintenance funds for proper maintenance of the roads constructed
under PMGSY.
5.2.6 As PMGSY programme funds can be utilized only for works sanctioned
by this Ministry under the programme, the issue mentioned at para4.2.2(a) of additional work should be looked into by SRRDA and
comments on the same may be given to this Ministry.
5/3-Extract of Master roll
5.2.7 Besides, issues/observations(As per Index) emerged during filed visit
may also be looked into by the programme division.
5.3 Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Grantee Act:
5.3.1
Payment of wages: It was observed that payment of wages under the programme is made through Banks or Post
Office and almost payment are made within fortnight period after the date on which such work was done.
5.3.2
Social Audit: MGNERA gives a central role to “Social audits” to ensure public accountability in the implementation of
projects, laws and policies. Besides, it is done through Gram Sabha meetings which strengthen the Panchayati Raj System.
36
I was told that Gram Sabha meetings are conveyed twice in a year and social audit takes place twice a year during Gram Sabha
meetings and same was also observed from the documents produced before me. However, the filling of the Performa looked mechanical to
me as there were no complaints or no major issues recorded on. During the social audit BDO or some other official(s) of the Panchayat
Samiti attend the social audit as witness. In the social audit there would be discussions on expenditure and if there was any misuse of funds,
it was required to be refunded. However, no dissenting opinions in any manner were recorded . It was to the no. of voters of the Gram
Panchayat in almost all Graobserved participation of people in the Social
Audit was very less in comparison m Panchayats Visited. In this regard, I
was told that public neither take any interest nor participate in Gram Sabha
while Social Audit is conducted and it is very difficult to conduct social audit
as per prescribed norms. Therefore, there is a strong need for awareness
in the people about the importance of Gram Sabha, Social Audit and their
role in the planning and implementation of the schemes by way of Gram
Sadha, Social Audit.
It was observed that Gram Panchayats have to play a vital role in
implementation of the Schemes at Grass root level and for better planning,
implementation and monitoring of the schemes, the existing staff pattern is
not sufficient, resultantly adversely effecting the rural development
programmes. Therefore, it is advisable that the existing staff pattern at
Gram Panchayat level may be reviewed by the State and possibility to
post some more staff including Accounts experts may be ascertained.
Local Vigilance and Monitoring Committee,(VMC) at village level needs
to be emphasized to monitor the progress and quality of work while it is in
progress.
For transparency and accountability in the implementation of work
under MGNERA by way of public awareness, it has been envisaged that the
information about works would be displayed in the local language in the
proscribed format however during field visit no such type of Citizen Board
was observed neither at the under construction Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendras
visited nor at works done just before monsoon season. Therefore, it is
5/4 : Extract of Socila Audit proceedings
37
advisable that Citizen Information Board in local language should be erected at the work sites containing detailed information of work such as
name of the Programme, name of the work, estimated cost, date of commencement and due date/date of completion, description of work,
quantity of material involved etc. It is advisable that after completion of works, this may be in the form of a permanent brick-masonry/ concrete
structure at the work sites particularly in works of rural connectivity so that the works under the programme can be identified easily.
It was observed during filed visit that some Gram Panchayat Secretaries, who have to play a very vital roll in transparency and
accountability in the implementation of the rural development schemes at grass root level, were hesitating in producing information/data before
me whereas the programme guidelines envisages to make accessible all the documents to local people for the purpose of accountability and
transparency in the programme. Therefore, It is advisable that the staff at GP level may be imparted training on transparency, accountability,
access of records to the people and other implementation aspects of the programme.
5/5-NSAP beneficiaries
Community participation right from planning stage is vital for any infrastructure
project particularly rural connectivity. Therefore, it is advisable that before
sanctioning of works of rural connectivity under MGNREGA, availability of land
should be ensured to avoid any dispute at the time of executing of works.
Therefore, “transit walk” by the concerned AE/JE, accompanied by Patwari and
the Sarpanch/panch of the Gram Panchayat etc. to determine the most suitable
alignment and to sort out the issues of land availability for the proposal for rural
connectivity and attaching photographs of the transit walk and land availability
certificate with the proposals of Gram Panchayat to Apex Panchayat may be
ascertained.
As convergence of MGNREGA and PMGSY may be instrumental in
achievement the goals of Rural Road Development Plan : Vision 2025 by this
Ministry, the convergence should be emphasized and rural connectivity works
taken up under MGNREGA in the State may be as per PMGSY standards, as
envisaged under convergence guidelines.
Besides, issues/observations(As per Index) emerged during filed visit may
also be looked into by the programme division.
5.4 National Social Assistance Programme (NSAP):
It was observed that financial assistance under National Social Assistance Programme is disbursed on bio-monthly basis or after
interval of 5-6months instead of monthly basis. Possibilities may be ascertained to disburse the financial assistance on monthly basis.
38
As per provision under NSAP, the financial assistance including State contribution envisaged under IGNOAP is Rs.500/- per month
for age group 60-74 years, Rs750/- per month for age group between 75-79 years and Rs.1050/- per month for 80 years and above.
However, it was observed that all different age group beneficiaries are being paid financial assistance under IGNOAP at unique rate of
Rs.500/- per months. Therefore, there is a need to review the matter and taking necessary action by the implementing agency for
disbursing the financial assistance according to entitlement.
As BPL families are targeted to cover under different components of the National Social Assistance Programme(NSAP) taking into
their age etc. During visiting the Gram Panchayats, I was told that GPs did not maintain any record about beneficiaries under various
components of NSAP . In this regards, it is recommended that :(a) records should be maintained at Gram Panchayat level about beneficiaries under various components of the SNAP;
(b) formal discussion on NSAP in the Gram Sabha meetings and recording of the same in the Gram Sabha meetings’ proceedings may
be made compulsory.
(c) it may be ensured that all eligible BPL families/idividuals are covered under respective components of NSAP as per their eligibility;
(d) NSAP may also be reviewed at Block level on quarterly basis and at District level on six monthly basis by the respective Panchayat.
Besides, issues/observations(As per Index) emerged during filed visit may also be looked into by the programme division.
5.5 Swaranjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY)
Signboards containing name of SHG, Activity of the Group, name of the NGO etc. in respect of some SHGs under SGSY were
observed which is a good practice observed under the programme.
Most of the SHGs visited are at doormat stage and to bring the beneficiaries above the poverty line by ensuring appreciable sustained
level of income, it is necessary that status of SHGs may be reviewed and appropriate action for strengthen to the SHGs may be taken by
way of training etc. and their activities may be monitored and review from time to time.
The main activity covered under SGSY is Dairy. Possibility for covering of some other activities may also be ascertained taking into
account the availability of resources, skill and backward and forward linkages in the area and beneficiaries may be motivated for the same
and their skill may be developed through training etc.
Besides, issues/observations(As per Index) emerged during filed visit may also be looked into by the programme division.
5.6 Vigilance and monitoring Committee(V&MC):
The date of vigilance and monitoring committee meetings may be intimated to this Ministry well in advance so that a suitable
officer may be deputed to attend the meeting.
*******
39