Apropos the article “Can the CAG comment on policy?” (July 11) by Sukumar Mukhopadhyay, I have a few points to make. First, Section 13 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s (CAG) Duties, Powers and Conditions of Service (DPC) Act empowers him to question “to ascertain whether the moneys shown in the accounts as having been disbursed were legally available and applicable to the service or purpose to which they have been applied or charged and whether the expenditure conforms to the authority which governs it.” It is evident that if an executive policy violates propriety and/or transcends the confines of the law or Constitution, the fundamental concept of checks and balances requires CAG to report any executive malfeasance to Parliament. Mukhopadhyay says CAG can do so in the case of receipts under Section 16 of the DPC Act. But if CAG can question faulty policy for revenues under Section 16, he can do so for any illegality of expenditure under Section 13 as well.
Second, the 2G spectrum and Krishna-Godavari basin scams are not so much about receipts than about state policy that encourages collective malfeasance at the expense of an impoverished nation. Indeed these two cases are as much about receipts as they are about expenditure. Large initial expenses in both cases were borne by government of India agencies and revenues are yet to follow.
And finally, Mukhopadhyay’s plea for a presidential reference is misplaced because there is no scope for one. Rather the restrictions that the DPC Act places on CAG need to be removed and the new proposed Public Audit Bill should be passed by Parliament immediately.
Shantanu Basu, New Delhi
Readers should write to:
The Editor, Business Standard,
Nehru House,
4, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi 110 002,
Fax: (011) 23720201;
letters@bsmail.in
