A parliamentary panel has found several loopholes in the implementation of a key housing scheme, ‘Indira Awaas Yojana’ (IAY), in selection of beneficiaries, quality of work while also expressing its displeasure over “diversion” and “misappropriation” of funds.
In its report submitted to the Lok Sabha today, the Public Accounts Committee, in its report on the Ministry of Rural Development, spelt out the need for focus on efficient and effective utilization of budgetary grants, moving away from the existing tilt towards timely-utilization of grants.
There have been “serious shortcomings” in areas such as identification and selection of beneficiaries of the scheme, construction and quality of work, financial management, and monitoring and evaluation among others.
“The committee note several cases of operation of multiple bank accounts, diversion of IAY funds towards other scheme/programmes, expenditure on inadmissible items, misappropriation and suspected cases of misappropriation, unauthorised deduction of funds on account of administrative charges,” the reports states.
IAY, launched in 1985, is a flagship scheme of the Ministry of Rural Development designed to provide assistance to BPL families who are either houseless or have inadequate housing facilities.
The report noted as a “serious lapse” the fact that assessment has not been made about the actual housing shortage in 14 states even after the scheme had been ruuning for almost 30 years. It shows absence of planning and coordination with the states by the Ministry, the report said.
“What is even more disturbing for the Committee to note is that several ineligible beneficiaries were selected to reap the benefit,” it said.
The panel recommended that the Ministry should consider opening an online complaint facility to receive reports of deserving but deprived beneficiaries, those undeserving, delay in disbursal.
It said the facility should be activated not only while finalizing the list of beneficiaries but during the implementation of the scheme as well, so that the inaccuracies are always open to scrutiny.
The parliamentary committee noted with “disdain” that the Gram Sabha’s powers are “often” exercised in part by the sarpanch in matters of addition to and deletion from beneficiary lists of the scheme.
“Efforts should be made to ensure that only the Gram Sabha and the village communities in the Sixth Schedule areas as a collective body exercise such right and no intervention should be made by any functionary,” it said.
Under the heading construction of houses under IAY, the report said that actual complete construction of houses under IAY falls “far short” of the number of houses sanctioned and granst released.
A staggering 12.28 lakh houses, sanctioned prior to 2013-14, 22.35 lakh houses sanctioned in 2013-14 and 2014-15 are yet to be completed, the report said terming it as “huge” which implies a “serious gap” in implementation.
“The committee notes that ‘AwaasApp’ had been developed to enable inspection of progress in construction which is being used by 13 states. The committee recommend that the app should be mandatory in all states and UTs as a tool of inspection,” it said.
On quality of construction, it suggested that the National Institute of Rural Development be engaged to develop more housing designs which are of good quality, using locally available materials and aspects of cultural and aesthetic traits be included in the mason training curriculum.
Among other observations and suggestions, the committee noted that in 22 states, stipulated state-level vigilance and monitoring committee meetings were not held and in contravention of IAY guidelines, social audit of IAY was not conducted.
It envisaged the convergence of IAY with other schemes such as National Rural Water Supply Programme and Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidhyutikaran Programme so that benefits under these schemes can be extended to IAY beneficiaries.
