Delhi High Court
Centre For Research, Planning & ... vs Union Of India on 22 September, 2009
Author: Sanjiv Khanna
23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 6829/2008
CENTRE FOR RESERACH, PLANING & ACTION ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Yakesh Anand, Advocate.
versus
UOI ..... Respondent
Through Ms. Meera Bhatia, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
ORDER
% 22.09.2009
1. This is a second round of litigation filed by the petitioner i.e. Centre
for Research, Planning and Action. The first Writ Petition W.P.(C) No.
1540/05, filed by the petitioner was disposed of vide order dated
24.09.2007 directing the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare to dispose
of the representation of the petitioner dated 22.09.2007. The said direction
was given by this court as the impugned orders dated 24.09.2001
withdrawing financial aid and assistance to the petitioner were passed
without hearing and compliance with the principles of natural justice.
2. After the order dated 24.09.2007, Government of India, Ministry of
Health and Family Welfare (NGO Division) re-examined the entire factual
W.P. (C) No. 6829/2008 Page 1
position and has passed orders dated 23.06.2008. Both orders dated
24.09.2001 and 23.06.2008 have been impugned in the present Writ
Petition.
3. The petitioner was appointed as a Mother Unit NGO (Nodal Agency)
under the Rolling Fund Scheme in the year 1992. As a Mother Unit the
petitioner was to monitor the progress of the field NGOs working under
them. The petitioner from time to time requisitioned and was granted
Mother Unit status under the scheme.
4. A team constituting of Dr. P.C. Bhatnagar and Mr. M. Ghosh, Head of
the Department, Voluntary Health Association of India (VHAI, for short)
evaluated working and performance of the petitioner. It was observed that
petitioner was not maintaining books of accounts regularly and the
petitioner had no sources. It was noticed that as per the balance sheet of
the petitioner there were negligible assets but on physical verification
several assets could be observed. The petitioner was not able to justify and
explain the source of these assets and no formal agreements i.e. MOU
could be produced. The report states that the petitioner was also not
maintaining any salary register and manner of payment of staff salary was
also ambiguous. In the final analysis the report recommended that the
petitioner was a research organization rather than an implementing
W.P. (C) No. 6829/2008 Page 2
organization having very little field experience. Need to improve the
financial system was noticed. In view of the report submitted by VHAI, the
petitioner's request for Mother NGO status was not rejected and ceased
w.e.f. 31.03.1998 and thereafter no grant-in-aid was released to the
petitioner.
5. The petitioner subsequently made a request for release of Rs.18.21
lacs towards recoupment amounts that the petitioner had disbursed to
sub-NGO/Field Units during the period prior to 31.3.1998 for projects which
were sanctioned by them. It appears that some complaints had been
received against the petitioner for mis-appropriation of funds. To examine
the working and operation of the petitioner, Family Planning Association of
India, Mumbai (FPAI for short) was asked to conduct an evaluation of the
performance of the petitioner under the rolling funds scheme. FPAI visited
two field units viz. Harijan Pichda Warg Kalyan Samiti and Hast Kala Vikas
Kendra of Bihar, conducted investigation and submitted their report.
6. As per the said report, the petitioner had never visited the sites to
assess the working of Harijan Pichda Warg Kalyan Samiti and Hast Kala
Vikas Kendra of Biharat Madhubani. The petitioner in response admitted
that they were receiving progress reports from the field units and these
progress reports were duly verified by the Medical Officer and, therefore,
W.P. (C) No. 6829/2008 Page 3
petitioner was satisfied with the progress. FPAI noticed other irregularities
in the records of the Field NGOs. It was found that the project manager of
Harijan Pichda Warg Kalyan Samiti was one Smt. Buchi Devi, who was also
the Secretary of Hastha Kala Kendra. She was an old lady of 65 years of age
and was just literate as she could only sign in Hindi. She was paid monthly
salary of Rs.2,000/-. Similarly, it was noticed that one Mr. G.S. Thakur who
was intermediate in Accounts was paid monthly salary of Rs.1,500/- per
month for maintaining accounts. The field workers could not be traced in
the village. The field NGO could not produce any documentary evidence
about staff selection including their applications, letter of appointment,
joining report etc. It was noticed that field NGO Harijan Pichda Warg Kalyan
Samiti had taken on rent a building owned by the husband of Smt. Buchi
Devi. Adverse comments were also made by FPAI on account of Capital
purchases. It was found that the performance of field NGO was not up to
the mark.
7. Similarly, comments were made with regard to the second NGO
Hastha Kala Kendra. The cash book and ledger were found to be poorly
maintained and the persons who were maintaining the said account books
had no knowledge about the working of the office. Vouchers were not
available. The second Field NGO had employed a manager, two field
W.P. (C) No. 6829/2008 Page 4
workers and their names were mentioned in the Cash book. However there
was no personal file or letter of appointment, attendance register etc.
Discrepancies in purchase of Capital assets were notice. The field NGO had
taken on rent a room in a building owned by family of one Mr. Arun Kumar.
No formal rent deed was signed and payment of Rs.250/- per month was
made. It appears that the said Arun Kumar is none other than Mr. Arun
Kumar Mehto, Secretary of the Field NGO. Mr. Arun Kumar Mehto had
confessed that certain purchases were not made but recorded in the books
of said Field NGO.
8. In view of the aforesaid, I do not think any relief can be granted to
the petitioner. The petitioner was given opportunity and after examining
their objections, the orders dated 23rd June, 2008 have been passed.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
SEPTEMBER 22, 2009
HL/VKR
W.P. (C) No. 6829/2008 Page 5
