Document Sample

              ISSUED BY:
          GUWAHATI – 781 011

        JUNE , 2008 * ISSUE NO.2/4

              ISSUED BY:
        GUWAHATI – 781 011

      June, 2008   * ISSUE NO. 2/4


      This is the 2nd issue of the quarterly Vigilance Bulletin for the year
2008, being brought out by Vigilance Organisation of N.F.Railway for
guidance and information to railwaymen.

      This issue of Vigilance Bulletin contains some excerpts from Chetna
Aahwaan of Railway Board, important system improvement suggested &
implemented and latest letters/ circulars of Railway Board as also the
Central Vigilance Commission.

       The Bulletin also includes some activities undertaken by Zonal
Vigilance in saving Railway revenue/ irregularities detected by zonal
vigilance. These are not by way of eulogising Vigilance department’s
achievements but are meant to alert the various executive departments to be
on the look-out for these tell-tale signs of corruption and mala fide activities
in the offing. They will, it is hoped, also act as a warning to those in the
organization, who may be tempted to breach the dividing line between right
and wrong for their self- seeking ends.

      We welcome suggestions for improvement of the bulletin which may
please be addressed to the undersigned or to the Vigilance
Department/N.F.Railway. We would also request our readers to contribute
to our future issues and send their views on various aspects of our Railway


                                                       SDGM & CVO,
                                                  N.F.Railway, Maligaon.


SL.No.                    Description                            Page.

1.                                                                 3

2.   Corruption”: Ethical Behaviour and Management in Offices,
     Public Places and at Home.                                    4

3.   Light A Candle.                                               7

4.   Important System Improvement.                                 10

5.   Important letters/circulars of CVC & Railway Board.           12

6.   Some Important Achievements/Case histories.                   34

                   “Corruption”: Ethical Behaviour and
             Management in Offices, Public Places and at Home.

                                                                    SDGM/CR and


We live in a dynamic society, a society in which change is intrinsic. The key to an
organization’s effectiveness lies in its ability to adapt to these changes. It not
only requires a fresh perspective on the problems but also on their solutions.
The problem of corruption should be viewed in the larger perspective of ethical
behaviour and management in offices, public places and at home. This article
tries to examine corruption and its link to ethical behavior and various human


For finding long-term answers, we will have to address the root cause of
corruption. Since times immemorial, greed has been identified as the basic cause
of corruption. Greed is an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what
one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth.
Notwithstanding the fact that ‘desire’ and ‘needs’ sometimes can be subjective
categories , we need to draw lines for acceptable behavior. The emphasis on
high moral values, for both individuals and organizations, acts as a restraint and
checks the growth of greed. Before it becomes too clichéd, let us add that to
ensure high standards of ethical values, we as an organization need to recognize
and appreciate such values in an employee so that others feel encouraged to
emulate them.


Overcoming greed brings one to the next logical element of life-contentment.
Contentment is a state of mind and is the key to living a joyful and blessed life.
To be content, we need to do some soul searching.

Are   we   content   with our family and surroundings?
Are   we   content   with our jobs?
Are   we   content   with our lives?
Are   we   content   at all…?

Contentment lies not in acquiring wealth but in our ability to assess the overall
fulfillment in life-of helping the needy and bringing a smile to the face of a
customer. It reminds us of the famous story of Leo Tolstoy, where a greedy man
wants a piece of land and is given the option to go round the area he desires to
have and mark out the same before sunset. Greed overpowers him in this pursuit
as he keeps on increasing the periphery-failing to circumscribe the area before
sunset and in the end dies due to exhaustion, thus, paying the ultimate price.
The key to success in living an abundant life is contentment and the basic source
of contentment lies in our ability to draw a line, a line between what is right and
what is wrong.


Life is actually simple- we had nothing when we started and we take nothing
with us when we leave. The desire to acquire and possess everything between
these two stages is the bane of existence. Gandhiji wrote in Hind Swaraj:

“We notice that mind is a restless bird, the more it gets the more it wants, and
still remains unsatisfied. The more we indulge our passions, the more unbridled
they become. A man is not necessarily happy because he is rich or unhappy
because he is poor”.

It is only by going beyond trivial materialistic desires that one can truly hope to
secure happiness. However, in any organizational set up, mere preaching about
the virtues of values will not ensure the desired change. The whole working
philosophy of that organization or institution has to be in sync with the
expectations from its individuals. The Infosyses and Wipros of today are apt
examples of this.


It is indeed tempting and easy to link the problem of corruption with moral
erosion in society. Often, one hears that our staff and officers are part of this
very society and the general degradation in values is bound to reflect in their
working. The argument not only avoids a solution but also gives us the excuse to
escape the problem. We need to interrogate this perception and determine ways
in which public officials can rededicate themselves to observing higher standards
of honesty in their jurisdictions and work places. To achieve this, our strategy
has to be multi pronged:-

   •   Set personal examples before we preach.

   •   Encourage sincerity by entrusting higher responsibilities to those with
       proven credentials, because an honest performance is always better than
       one put up through questionable resources.

   •   Institutionalize fair and transparent working in government departments.
       The Right to Information Act will go a long way in creating an
       environment that is conducive to this.

   •   Develop a system that first relegates and then weeds out persons of
       dubious integrity.


Integrity depends on the extent to which ethical standards and behavior of
individuals support the moral values of the organization. Individuals must be
empowered and trusted to serve the public good .This is a long term process and
requires untiring commitment instead of lip service.

The path may be difficult, but there is still hope and hope, as they say, can move
mountains. There are valorous stories of dedication and shining examples of
sacrifice in every organization. The need of the hour is to mould the entire ethos
and work culture of an organization around them, rather than treating them as
mere articles in monthly magazines.

Courtsey: Chetna Aahwaan, 2007 issue.

                               Light A Candle



The importance of maintaining probity in public life can hardly be over
emphasized. The bull of corruption is raging and all efforts to tame it seem to be
just not enough. We have all kinds of rules, manuals, codes of conduct –legal,
administrative, moral, religious, etc. –but somehow they appear to be losing the
tug-of-war against the monster of corruption. As a result, the people at large
seem to be resigned to the phenomenon of corruption as a fact of life about
which nothing can be done.

It is difficult to outrightly lambast the people for their attitude of helplessness
against corruption because day in and day out the media is bombarding them
with exploits of corrupt bureaucrats, businessmen, politicians, judges, police et al
.The TV channels are flashing unedifying spectacles of a Minister being escorted
to jail, a Director General of Police being arrested, a former Chief Secretary being
raided to unearth assets disproportionate to his income, accusing fingers being
raised at a top judge for judicial misconduct to favour kin, former Chief Minister
coming under the scanner of Vigilance Bureau, etc. Every day there are reports
of scams in recruitments, tax evasion, awards of tenders, land allotments, etc.
We hear with sickening regularity fresh episodes of corruption involving
educational institutions, corporate houses, hospitals, NGOs, religious trust, etc.
As if this is not enough, the newspapers inform us dutifully about the latest
ranking of our country in the list of most corrupt nations of the world and
whether, as compared to the last time, we are a few notches above or below
some of our neighbours.

However, even in this darkening atmosphere dotted with the presence of
corrupt elements in all spheres of life, we do see that slowly but surely a
concerned citizenry, an alert media, a resolute judiciary, various constitutional
institutions, anti-corruption fora , RTI activists, etc. are waging their small wars
to take the bull of corruption by the horns There is no dearth of instances in
which the high and the mighty have been hauled over the coals for their corrupt
deeds. The cynics might dismiss the achievements of the anti-corruption forces
as a drop in the ocean but they need to remember that it is better to light a
candle than to keep cursing the darkness.

The battle against corruption may look stupendous but there are examples to
show that even an individual’s crusade does matter. Remember the valiant
whistle blower Satyendra Dubey? Satyendra was an honest and upright engineer
working on the Golden Quadrilateral Highway project .Outrages by the corruption

he encountered, he took on the construction mafia pulling up contractors for
shoddy work and notifying superiors. Frustrated with inaction, he finally wrote to
the highest authorities urging action and requesting confidentiality.
Unfortunately, the bureaucratic chain failed to maintain the secrecy of the
complaint and the young man had to make the supreme sacrifice of his life for
upholding the highest ideals of probity in public life. Though a young life of
immense value was cruelly sniffed out, his noble example has inspired a whole
young generation to fight corruption. The trail blazed by this crusader is being
pursued by the S.K.Dubey Foundation for Fight Against Corruption in India.
Besides, following his example, a large number of people are taking recourse to
whistle blowing against corrupt public servants. The CVC has institutionalized the
receipt and disposal of complaints received under the “Public Interest Disclosure
Resolution”(PIDR) to ensure complete confidentiality about the identity of whistle
blowers. This mechanism has become a powerful tool for those who wish to
expose corruption without compromising their identity. The Government has also
empowered the common man with the Right to Information under the RTI act,
2005 . Stories abound about how people have taken recourse to this democratic
weapon to seek relevant information to expose corrupt practices and to enforce
transparency in administration.

More importantly, however, our efforts for a corruption free society need to be
directed inwards. Charity beings at home. Double standards and ‘holier than
thou’ attitude cannot take us anywhere .We need to learn to be content with a
simple life and refuse to join the rat race. If contentment is missing, no amount
of comforts of life can suffice for us.

Taking a lackadaisical attitude towards corruption would mean that we are
burying our head in sand expecting the storm of corruption to blow over .If we
do that, we are ignoring the colossal cost of corruption the society has to bear.
Corruption aggravates         poverty. Surveys of the very poor in developing
countries point to corruption as having a significant and detrimental impact on
their lives. For a poor household, the bribe extorted by a policeman may mean
that the family cannot afford school fees for their children, or cannot buy goods
to maintain its small business and source of income. Corruption not only reduces
the net income of the poor but also wrecks programmes related to their basic
needs, from sanitation to education to healthcare. Corruption also erodes the
growth rate of a nation’s economy and consequently adversely affect the lives of
all sections of society. The poorest are the hardest hit. Each one of us has to pay
the price for acquiescing in corruption.

The danger in accepting corruption as a ‘necessary evil’ is that it begins to look
more and more necessary and less and less evil. It is fallaciously assumed by
some people that it is for the vigilance, the police, the CBI, CVC etc. to do
something about corruption. The fact is that if the war against corruption has to

succeed even modestly, every citizen of the country has to put his shoulder to
the wheel. Only then can we hope to bequeath a cleaner and progressive India
to the upcoming generation.

Courtsey: Chetna Aahwaan, 2007 issue.



                                                               Office of the
                                                           Chief Vigilance Officer,
No.Z/VIG/68/O/5                                              Dated:18.03.08

Pr.CE/ MLG &

           Sub: Design Mix .for Reinforced Cement Concrete (RCC)/Plain Cement
                   Concrete (PCC) work.

       During a Vigilance check, it was noticed that controlled / design mixes of
RCC/PCC work are prepared at ADEN/XEN level by adopting arbitrary/ assumed
design data without ensuring test result of materials used for concrete work. In
some cases; it has been observed that material testing is not done at all and
concrete mixes are designed improper for which basic purpose of design mix is
not fulfilled.

       Therefore, it is suggested that the design mix should be got certified
either by recognized institute or even by ADEN/ AXEN/ XEN of Railway after
obtaining proper testing of construction materials from recognized institution/
laboratory and same should be approved by DEN/Sectional Sr. DEN in Open Line
and Dy. CE in Construction unit prior to start of the work.

      It is requested to issue suitable instructions to all concerned officials for
implementation of above system improvement.

\                                                                 Sd/-
                                                              CVO & SDGM
                                                           N.F.Railway, Maligaon.

                                                                Office of the
EPS - 518                                                  General Manager(P)
NO. E/254/O/Pt.XV ( C )                                Maligaon, Dated:28.05.08

        Sub: Promotion to non-selection post-suitability conducted on the basis of
             record of service and confidential reports - procedure to be adopted.

                 SDGM/CVO vide his note no.Z/SS/SDGM/Policy/08 dated 31.03.08
has informed that a case has come to notice, whereby the promotion by
suitability conducted on the basis of service record and annual confidential
reports has resulted in the promotion of a candidate who had been long absent
and has still not joined on promotion.

              So, for preventing a candidate get promoted irrespective of his
performing a gross misconduct of long un-authorised absence, the following
guidelines to be followed before conducting suitability on the basis of service
record and annual confidential reports only.

   1.      The officer assessing suitability must obviously notify to the executive
           department, the names of all the candidates coming within the zone of

   2.      Before selection is conducted SPE/VIG clearance should be obtained
           from SDGM/CVO and DAR clearance should be obtained from
           executive deptt.

   3.      Member of Personnel deptt. in the selection Board should specifically
           record that the confirmation of vigilance and DAR clearance have been
           obtained. Where such positive recording of clearance is not done,
           selection Board should not draw the proceedings.

                                                    For General Manager(P)/MLG.


                            Government of India
                        Central Vigilance Commission.

                                                Satarkata Bhawan, Block ‘A’,
                                                    GPO Complex, INA,
                                                    New Delhi-1100203,
                                                  Dated the 1st May, 2008

                    CIRCULAR NO.17/4/08

Subject: Rotation of officials working in sensitive posts.

      Attention is invited to the Commission’s circular no.98/VGL/60 dated
15.4.99 and 2.11.01.

2.      The Commission vide circular dated 15.4.99 , had asked the CVOs of
Ministries/ Departments/ Organizations to identify the sensitive posts in their
organizations and also to send to the Commission, the list of posts so
identified. Further, CVOs were also asked to ensure that officials posted on
sensitive posts were rotated every two/ three years to avoid developing
vested interest.

3.     No information in this regard has been received in the Commission so
far. The CVOs may, therefore, complete the exercise expeditiously now, and
send to the Commission, a list of posts identified as sensitive in their
organization. The exercise may be completed by 30th June 2008.

                                                             (Rajiv Verma)
                                                           Under Secretary.

                            Government of India
                        Central Vigilance Commission.

                                                      Satarkta Bhawan,
                                                                Block A
                                                    GPO Complex, INA,
                                                     New Delhi-110023
                                             Dated, the 24th April,2008.
                          Circular No.15/4/08

Sub: Reference to the Commission for reconsideration of its

    The Commission has expressed serious concern about receiving
repeated requests for the reconsideration of its advice that give the
impression of being routine in nature. The present instructions contained
in para 5.16, Chapter 1 of Vigilance Manual, Vol.I provide that where the
department propose to take a lenient view or stricter view than that
recommended by the commission, consultation with the CVC is necessary.
The departments, therefore, are required to approach the Commission for
advice in such cases before a final decision is taken. It has also been
stated that the reference for reconsideration of the commission’s advice
should be made only once. Subsequently it was instructed vide letter
no.000/DSP/1 dated 6.3.2000 that reconsideration proposals should be
sent within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the
Commission’s advice. It has been observed that the proposals for
reconsideration of the Commission’s advice are not sent within the
stipulated time. Further, justification warranting reconsideration is also not

2. In view of the position stated above, the Commission has reviewed its
instructions in the matter. The commission’s advice is based on the inputs
received from the organization and where the Commission has taken a
view different from the one proposed by the organization, it is on account
of the Commission’s perception of        the seriousness of the lapses or
otherwise. In such cases there is no scope for reconsideration. The
Commission has, therefore, decided that no proposal for reconsideration
of the Commission’s advice would be entertained unless new additional
facts have come to light which would have the effect of altering the
seriousness of the allegations/charges leveled against an officer. Such new
facts should be substantiated by adequate evidence and should also be
explained as to why the evidence was not considered earlier, while
approaching the Commission for its advice. The proposals for
reconsideration of the advices, if warranted, should be submitted at the
earliest but within two months of receipt of the Commission’s advice. The
proposals should be submitted by the disciplinary authority or it should

clearly indicate that the proposal has the approval of the disciplinary

3 The above instructions may be noted for strict compliance.

                                                        (Vineet Mathur)

                        Government of India
                    Central Vigilance Commission.

                                                         Satarkta Bhawan,
                                                                   Block A
                                                       GPO Complex, INA,
                                                        New Delhi-110023
                                                  Dated,the 21st July,2006

                            Circular no.28/7/06

           Subject: Adherence to time limit in processing of
disciplinary cases.

   Attention is invited to the Commission’s office order no.50/05/04 issued
vide no.000/VGL/18 dated 9.8.04 on the above mentioned subject.

2. The Commission has noted with concern that the observance of time
schedule           in conducting investigations and departmental inquiries,
as laid down in its letter no.000/VGL/18 dated 23.5.2000, is often lax and
there are similar delays noticed on part of the decision making authorities,
leading to the disciplinary proceedings getting indefinitely prolonged.

3. The Commission has also noticed that sometimes the disciplinary
   authorities misinterpret the Supreme Court Judgment in the case of
   K.V.Jankiraman etc. Vs Union of India regarding adopting sealed cover
   procedure on the recommendations of departmental promotion
   committee for certain categories of officials. In this regard, DOPT has
   already issued instructions/clarifications vide letter no.22011/4/91-
   Estt(A) dated 14.9.92 clearly stating that in accordance with the
   Supreme Court ruling in the K.V.Jankiraman etc. vs Union of India
   case, the findings of the departmental promotion committee in respect
   of the following categories of officials would be kept in a sealed

      i)     Government servants under suspension;
      ii)    Government servants in respect of whom a charge-sheet has
             been issued and disciplinary proceedings are pending; and
      iii)   Government servants in respect of whom prosecution for a
             criminal charge is pending.

4. The above instructions also provide that a Government servant who is
   recommended for promotion by the DPC but in whose case any of the
   above circumstances arise after the date of receipt of recommendation
   of the DPC but before he is actually promoted, would be considered as
   if his case had been placed in a sealed cover by the DPC. He shall not

   be promoted until he is completely exonerated of the charges against

5. All administrative authorities may be suitably advised to take note of,
   and strictly adhere to the prescribed time schedule in dealing with the
   disciplinary cases. Further, it is also necessary to correctly
   interpret/apply the Supreme Court judgment in Jankiraman case on
   ‘sealed cover’ in the light of instructions issued by the DOPT.

6. Undue delays on part of administrative authorities, in dealing with
   disciplinary cases, will be viewed seriously by the Commission and it
   would be constrained to advise penal action against those found


                          GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
                           MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
                              RAILWAY BOARD.

NO.2008/V-1/CBI/1/1                           New Delhi, dated May 07, 2008

         Sub: Constitution of Committee of Experts for scrutiny of a
             Proposal for reconsideration of prosecution sanctions.

      Attention is invited to the Board’s letter no.2006/V-1/CBI/2/1 dated
12.06.06 (RBV No.24/2006), laying down time limits for processing cases,
proposed for Sanction of Prosecution.

2.     In this connection, the CVC has decided to constitute a panel of
experts of six eminent persons, for scrutiny of reconsideration proposals
where the Commission and the CBI have advised sanction for prosecution
against the suspected public servants. Depending upon the nature of the
case, a committee consisting of three members, including the Chairperson,
shall examine the CBI recommendation and the tentative view of the
Ministry/Department concerned in greater detail. The committee shall consist
of two members drawn from the panel of six experts and one of the Vigilance
Commissioners would chair the meeting. Based on the recommendations of
the experts committee, the CVC would render appropriate advice to the
competent authority within 15 days of the meeting of the committee.

   3. It is, therefore, emphasised that the CBI’s proposal for Sanction of
Prosecution of the suspected public servants should be scrutinized thoroughly,
before arriving at a decision to disagree with CBI and Commission’s
recommendation to prosecute the suspected Railway Servant.

                                                               (Sanjay Goel)
                                                        Director Vigilance (M)
                                                               Railway Board.

                             RBV NO. 03/2008.
                             Government of India
                             Ministry of Railways
                               (Railway Board)

No.2005/V-1/DAR/1/12                        New Delhi dated February 29, 2008.

        Sub: Reconsideration of Vigilance cases by CVC in which CVC
             have advised ‘Administrative Action.’

            The Board’s letters of even number dated 17.01.06 (RBV
no.02/06) and dated 18.10.2006, on the above subject, are hereby withdrawn
with immediate effect.

               Henceforth, such cases in which CVC has advised Administrative
action in its 1st stage advice and if after consideration of the points raised by
the Charged Officer, the DA proposes to deviate and take an action at
variance with CVC’s advice, DA shall first record his provisional views. The
case shall then have to be referred to the Commission through Board
Vigilance for reconsideration of its advice as is being followed in other cases
of deviation.

                                                                  (Sanjay Goel)
                                                          Director Vigilance (M)
                                                                Railway Board

                                                           Office of the
Pass- 298                                                General Manager (P)
NO. E/176/5(C) Pt.II                               Maligaon, Dated:28.04.08

                 Sub: Issue of passes to contractors and the staff working
                      with the contractors.

      A copy of Railway Board’s letter no. E(W)2007 PS 5-6/53 dated
27.03.08 (RBE no.48/2008) on the above subject is forwarded herewith for
information and necessary guidance please.

                                                          Sd/- S.C.Banerjee,
                                                           For GM(P)/MLG.

(Copy of Rly.Bd’s letteer no.E(W)2007 PS 5-6/53 dt.27.3.08)

           Sub: Issue of passes to contractors and the staff working with the

       In terms of Railway Servants (Pass) Rules, 1986 (second edition,1993)
Passes can be issued in favour of non-railway persons under certain
conditions as laid-down in Schedule VII of the Pass Rules. In case railway has
to issue Passes to non-railway persons for purposes connected with railway
working, such cases are required to be sent to Board for approval.

    2. A case has come to the notice of Board in which a provision for issue
of Ist class card passes and cheque passes to contractors and staff working
with the contractors has been incorporated in the contract agreement on one
of the railways, which does not have Board’s approval . This has been viewed
seriously by Board and it has been decided that facilities of card passes and
cheque passes should not be provided to the contractors and staff working
with the contractors with a view to rule out possibility of misuse of such Free
pass facility by non railway persons.

    3. This issues with the concurrence of the Finance Dte. Of the Ministry of

                                                   ( Debasis Mazumder)
                                                Joint Director Estt.(Welfare)
                                                      Railway Board.

                                                            Office of the
                                                        General Manager(P)
DAC- 639                                             Maligaon, Guwahati-11.
No.E/74/O/Pt.XVII(C)                                   Dated: 07.05.08

                Sub: Communication of Government’s Displeasure to Retired
                      Railway Servants reg.

        A copy of Railway Board’s letter no. E(D&A)2003 RG6-35 dated
21.04.08 (RBE no.56/08) on the above mentioned subjects is forwarded for
information and necessary action please. Board’s earlier letter no. E (D&A)
95RG6-32 dated 28.06.96 and 2.2.98 as referred to in their present letter was
circulated under GM (P)/ MLG’s letter DAC-562 No.E/72/OP-IX (C) dated

                                                              ( S.C.Banerjee)
                                                             For GM(P)/MLG.

( Copy of the Rly. Board’s letter no. E(D&A)2003 RG6-35 dated 21.04.08).

             Sub: Communication of Government’s Displeasure to Retired
                   Railway Servants reg.

         Attention of the Railways is invited to Board’s letter of even number
dated 30.09.2003 on the above subject. It was informed that the instructions
contained in Board’s letters no. E(D&A)95 RG6-32 dated 28.6.96 and 2.2.98
authorizing communication of Government’s Displeasure to the retired
railway servants has been quashed by CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi,
against which Writ Petition is being filed. It was also advised that in these
circumstances Government’s Displeasure may not be communicated to the
retired railway servants in terms of above instructions, till further orders.

2.      A Writ Petition had been filed against the aforesaid orders of Hon’ble
CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi. However, the same has since been
withdrawn. Hon’ble CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi’s aforesaid order has
thereby attained finality. Since the instructions dated 28.06.96 and 2.2.98
referred to in Para 1 above stand quashed, Government Displeasure should
not be communicated to the retired railway servants.

3.    Please acknowledge receipt.
                                                        (Harish Chander)
                                                   Dy.Director Esstt.(D&A)III
                                                          Railway Board.


                         Government of India
                    Central Vigilance Commission
                                            Satarkata Bhawan, Block ‘A’,
                                                      GPO Complex, INA
                                                     New Delhi-110023.
                        OFFICE MEMORANDUM
                           Circular No. 01/01/08      31st DEC, 2007
      Sub: Acceptance of Bank Guarantees.

A number of instances have come to the notice of the Commission where
forged/fake    bank    guarantees     have  been   submitted   by  the
contractors/suppliers. Organizations concerned have also not made any
effective attempt to verify the genuineness/authenticity of these bank
guarantees at the time of submission.

2. In this back ground, all organizations are advised to streamline the system
of acceptance of bank guarantees from contractors/suppliers to eliminate the
possibility of acceptance of any forged/fake bank guarantees.

3. The guidelines on this subject issued by Canara Bank provides for an
elaborate procedure, which may be found helpful for the organizations in
eliminating the possibility of acceptance of forged/fake bank guarantees. The
guidelines issued by Canara Bank provides that –

      “ The original guarantee should be sent to the beneficiary directly
      under Registered Post (A.D.). However, in exceptional cases, where
      the guarantee is handed over to the customer for any genuine reasons,
      the branch should immediately send by Registered Post (A.D.) an
      unstamped duplicate copy of the guarantee directly to the beneficiary
      with a covering letter requesting them to compare with the original
      received from their customer and confirm that it is in order. The A.D.
      card should be kept with the loan papers of the relevant guarantee.

      At times, branches may receive letters from beneficiaries, viz,
      Central/State Governments, public sector undertakings, requiring
      bank’s confirmation for having issued the guarantee. Branches must
      send the confirmation letter to the concerned authorities promptly
      without fail.”

4. Therefore, all organizations are advised to evolve the procedure for
acceptance of BGs, which is compatible with the guidelines of Banks/Reserve
Bank of India. The steps to be ensured should include -

      i)     Copy of proper prescribed format on which BGs are accepted
             from the contractors should be enclosed with the tender
             document and it should be verified verbatim on receipt with
             original document.
      ii)    It should be insisted upon the contractors, suppliers etc. that
             BGs to be submitted by them should be sent to the organization
             directly by the issuing bank under Registered Post (A.D.).
      iii)   In exceptional cases, where the BGs are received through the
             contractors, suppliers etc., the issuing branch should be
             requested to immediately send by Registered Post (A.D.) an
             unstamped duplicate copy of the guarantee directly to the
             organization with a covering letter to compare with the original
             BGs and confirm that it is in order.
      iv)    As an additional measure of abundant precaution, all BGs should
             be independently verified by the organizations.
      v)     In the organization/unit, one officer should be specifically
             designated with responsibility for verification, timely renewal
             and timely encashment of BGs.

5. Keeping above in view, the organizations may frame their own detailed
guidelines to ensure that BGs are genuine and encashable.

6. Receipt of the above guidelines should be acknowledged.

                                                    (Smt. Padamaja Varma)
                                                   Chief Technical Examiner.

                                                        RBS No.15/2007
                            Government of India
                            Ministry of Railways
                              (Railway Board)

No. 99/RS (G)/779/2                         New Delhi, dated. 15-10- 2007.

         Sub: Tendering Process – Negotiations with L-1

       The instructions issued by CVC, vide their Order No.005/CRD/012
dated 03.03.2007, on the above matter have been examined in detail by a
Committee of Additional Members consisting of AM/CE, AM/RS, AM/F &
AM/ME as nominated by Board. Accepted recommendation of the Committee
on the guidelines contained in CVC’s letter dated 03.03.2007 are detailed

(ii)    There should normally be no negotiations. Negotiations will strictly be
        an exception rather than rule and only where rates received are
        unjustifiably higher and also in situation of cartel formation with
        unreasonable rates.
        Before resorting to negotiations, adequate care should be taken to
        scrutinize the rates received to avoid in fructuous instances of
        negotiations as such negotiations may cause unnecessary delay in
        procurement without any appreciable reduction in rates.

(iii)   Negotiations, wherever held, should only be with the L-1 tenderer as
        explained in Board’s letter of even no. dated 01.03.2000.

(iv)    There shall be no compromise to transparency, equity or fair treatment
        in acceptance of tenders. Prescribed time frame of settling tenders is to
        be strictly adhered to .

(v)     (a) As regards the splitting of quantities, some organizations have
        expressed apprehensions that pre-disclosing the distribution of
        quantities in the bid document may not be feasible, as the capacity of
        L-1 firm may not be known in advance. It may be stated that if, after
        due processing, it is discovered that the quantity to be ordered is far
        more than what L-1 alone is capable of supplying and there was no
        prior decision to split the quantities, then the quantity being finally
        ordered should be distributed among the other bidders in a manner
        that is fair, transparent and equitable.

        (b) while deciding in advance to have more than one source of supply,
        Railway should keep in view the various extant guidelines issued by
        Railway Board from time to time on the matter of splitting of the
        tender quantity and with specific reference to :
            (i)   Past Performance

    (ii)   Capacity
    (iii)  Delivery requirements in the tender
    (iv)   Quantity under procurement
    (v)    Vital/critical nature of the items.
In all cases of pre-decided split ordering, the following shall be
stipulated as tender conditions:

(i)     The purchaser reserves the right to distribute the procurable
        quantity on one or more of the eligible tenderers. Zone of
        consideration of such eligible tenderers will be the right of the

(ii)    Whenever such distribution/splitting of the tendered/procurable
        quantity is made, the quantity distribution will depend upon the
        differential of rates quoted by the tenderers ( other aspects i.e.
        adequate capacity-cum-capability, satisfactory past performance
        of the tenderers, outstanding orders load for the Railway
        making the procurement etc. being same/similar). For example:
        if the differential of rates between the L-1 and L-2 eligible
        vendors is 5%, then the distribution of quantity will be
        approximately in the ratio 55:45 (55% for the L-1 tenderer). If
        the price differential is 3%, then the distribution of quantity will
        be approximately in the ratio 53:47 (53% for the L-1 tenderer)
        and so on.

(iii)   The rate of the highest eligible tenderer within the zone of
        consideration has to be, per-se, reasonable to the purchaser.

(iv)    In    the    cases of inadequate          capacity-cum-capability,
        dissatisfactory past performance, large quantity of outstanding
        orders (liquidation of which will take very longtime) etc. the
        purchaser shall have the right to distribute the procurable
        quantity amongst tenderers with due consideration of these
        constraints and in such a manner as would ensure timely supply
        of materials in requisite quantity to meet the needs of operation,
        maintenance, safety etc. of the Railways regardless of inter-se
        ranking of the tenderers and in a fair and transparent manner
        with due conformity to the principle of natural justice and

(v)     Counter offer to L-1, in order to arrive at an acceptable price,
        shall amount to negotiation. However, any counter-offer
        thereafter to L-2, L-3, etc. (at the rates accepted by L-1) in case
        of splitting of quantities, as pre-disclosed in the tender, shall not
        be deemed to be a negotiation. However, in the cases where
        the rate of highest tenderer within the zone of consideration,
        per-se, is reasonable, and a counter offer is made only to

      economise the purchase, then the same may be done
      simultaneously to all the tenderers within the zone of
However, it may be noted that ordering on part-II approved vendors,
as per extant directives of Board, shall not construe splitting of the
procurable quantity.
The above instructions should be followed by Railways scrupulously.

This issues with the concurrence of Finance Directorate of Ministry of

                                              (Aruna Jain)
                                             Railway Board.

                       POLICY LETTER NO.RB/CEI/5/2007

                             GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
                             MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
                               (RAILWAY BOARD)

       No.2007/CE-1/CT/18                     New Delhi, dated 28.9.2007.

       Sub: Empowerment of Field Organizations (Works Contract

       Ref: (i) Board’s letter No.85/W-1/CT/7-Vol.1 dated 4.4.96
            (ii) Board’s letter No.94/CE-1/CT/4 dated 17.10.02.
            (iii) Board’s letter No.85/W-1/CT/7-Pt.I dated 18/19.4.06
            (iv) Board’s letter No.2003/CE-1/CT/4 Pt. Dated
                 12/16.5.06, 30.5.06 & 7.12.06.

       Pursuant to the recommendation of ED s committee constituted by
Board to give recommendation on the above subject, Board have amended
certain clauses in the existing General Conditions of Contract (GCC) and
provisions in the extant policy circulars relating to works contracts, as detailed
below, to enable more effective and efficient contract management.

        These modified clauses/provisions shall be applicable with prospective
effect in all future works contracts.

1. Introduction of Performance Guarantee (PG)

        A clause on Performance Guarantee was introduced in GCC vide item
(3) of Annexure to Board’s letter No. 2003/CE-1/CT/4 (Pt) dated 12/16.5.06 in
lieu of risk action procedure. This clause stands modified as under:-

      “The procedure for obtaining Performance Guarantee is outlined

   a. The successful bidder shall submit a Performance Guarantee (PG) in
      the form of an irrevocable bank guarantee amounting to 5% of the
      contract value.

   b. A Performance Guarantee shall be submitted by the successful bidder
      after the letter of acceptance has been issued, but before signing of
      the agreement. The agreement should normally be signed within 15
      days after the issue of LOA and the Performance Guarantee shall also
      be submitted within this time limit. This guarantee shall be initially
      valid up to the stipulated date of completion plus 60 days beyond that.
      In case, the time for completion of work gets extended, the contractor

        shall get the validity of Performance Guarantee extended to cover such
        extended time for completion of work plus 60 days.

     c. The Performance Guarantee (PG) shall be released after the physical
        completion of the work based on the ‘Completion Certificate’ issued by
        the competent authority stating that the contractor has completed the
        work in all respects satisfactorily. The security deposit, however, shall
        be released only after the expiry of the maintenance period and after
        passing the final bill based on ‘No Claim Certificate’.

     d. Wherever the contract is rescinded, the security deposit shall be
        forfeited and the Performance Guarantee shall be encashed and the
        balance work shall begot done independently without risk and cost of
        the failed contractor. The failed contractor shall be debarred from
        participating in the tender for executing the balance work. If the failed
        contractor is a JV or a partnership firm, then every member/partner of
        such a firm shall be debarred from participating in the tender for the
        balance work either in his/her individual capacity or as a partner of any
        other JV/partnership firm.

     e. The Engineer shall not make a claim under the Performance Guarantee
        except for amounts to which the President of Indian is entitled under
        the contract (not withstanding and/or without prejudice to any other
        provisions in the contract agreement) in the event of :

           i)     Failure by the contractor to extend the validity of the
                  Performance Guarantee as described herein above, in which
                  event the Engineer may claim the full amount of the
                  Performance Guarantee.

           ii)    Failure by the contractor to pay President of India any
                  amount due, either as agreed by the contractor or
                  determined under any of the Clauses/Conditions of the
                  agreement, within 30 days of the service of notice to this
                  effect by Engineer.

           iii)   The contract being determined or rescinded under provision
                  of the GCC the Performance Guarantee shall be forfeited in
                  full and shall be absolutely at the disposal of the President of

2.      Amendment to PVC clause in works contract

       In partial modification of Board’s letter No. 85/W-1/CT/7-Vol.1 dated
       the following changes are introduced regarding Price Variation Clause:-

      (i)     The minimum prescribed limit of one year of contract
              completion period for incorporating Price Variation Clause in
              tenders (para I(a) of above referred letter dated 4.4.96) stands

      (ii)    Price Variation Clause (PVC) shall be applicable for tenders of
              value more than Rs.1 crore irrespective of the contract
              completion period and PVC shall not be applicable to tenders of
              value less than Rs.1 crore.

      (iii)   The present stipulation that “Price Variation clause will not apply
              if the price variation is up to 5% and that
              reimbursement/recovery due to variation in prices will continue
              to be made only for the amount in excess of 5% of the amount
              payable to the contractor” vide para 1 of above referred letter
              dated 4.4.96 shall continue to be enforced. However, the
              existing upper limit prescribed at 15% and 25% (vide para I (b)
              and I (c) of Board’s letter dated 4.4.96 referred above) for price
              variation claim stands deleted.

3.   Earnest Money Deposit (EMD)

      The rules concerning Earnest Money Deposit modified vide Board’s
letters Nos. 2003/CE-1/CT/4 Pt.1 dated 12/16.5.06 (item (i) of the Annexure)
and letter no. 2003/CE-1/CT/4 Pt.1 dated 7.12.06 are further amended as
under :-

  Value of the work (Tender Value)                   EMD
For works estimated to cost upto Rs. 2% of the estimated cost of the work.
1 crore.
For works estimated to cost more Rs. 2 lakhs plus ½ % (half percent)
than Rs.1 crore                      of the excess of estimated cost of
                                     work beyond Rs.1 crore subject to a
                                     maximum of Rs.1 crore.

4.    Interest Rate for Advances extended by Railways.

       The extant interest rate for advances extended by Railways to
contractors fixed at 18% vide Board’s letter No. 90/CE-I/CT/1 dated 21.5.97
and advance correction slip issued under Board’s letter No.F(X)II-97/PW/4
dated 5.5.98 has since been reviewed by Board and the same has now been
downwardly revised as 14%.

5.    Solvency Certificate

     In partial modification to para of Annexure-1 of Board’s letter
No. 94/CEI/CT/4 dated 17.10.2002, the requirement of Revenue/Banker

Solvency Certificate as one of the minimum eligibility criteria (vide item (i) of
the table under para of the above referred Board’s letter) stands
deleted. However, the Tender Committee shall still examine the overall
financial soundness of the tenderers based upon the volume of work handled,
turn over, balance sheet etc.

6.     Imposition of token penalty for delay in the completion of

      The existing clause 17(B) of GCC provides for recovery of liquidated
damages from the contractor for delay in completion of work. It has now
been decided that the competent authority while granting extension to the
currency of contract under clause 17(B) of GCC may also consider levy of
token penalty as deemed fit based on the merit of the case.

7.     Limited Tenders

       Paras and of Annexure-1 of Board’s letter
No.94/CE.I/CT/4 dated 17.10.2002, which deal with monetary slabs for calling
limited tenders stand modified as under : The existing monetary ceiling for calling limited tenders may be
raised from Rs.1 crore to Rs. 5 crore. Existing four monetary slabs for calling limited tenders stand reduced
to three and revised as under :-

Sn.         Monetary slab for LT      Lowest Authority competent to
                                      approve calling of LT
1.    Up to Rs.25 lakhs               JAG and SG
2.    More than Rs.25 lakhs and up to SAG/DRM
      Rs.1 crore
3.    More than Rs.1 crore and up to PHOD/CHOD
      Rs.5 crore.

      Individual Railways may decide the “category of works” for which list of
approved contractors should be maintained for each monetary slab.

8.     Special Limited Tender (SLT)

       In partial modification to item (i) of para of Annexure-1 of
Board’s letter No. 94/CE-1/CT/4 dated 17.10.2002, it has now been decided
that CAO (C) with the concurrence of FA&CAO(C) may invite Special Limited
Tenders not only for specialized nature of work but all types of works
depending upon the merit of the case.

9.    Variation in contract quantities

       In supersession of paras 5.3.6, 5.3.7 & 5.3.9 of Annexure-1 of Board’s
letter No. 94/CE-1/CT/4 dated 17.10.2002, the procedure as detailed below
shall be adopted for dealing with variation in quantities during execution of
works contracts:

      (i)      Individuals NS items in contracts shall be operated with variation
               of plus or minus 25% and payment would be made as per the
               agreement rate. For this, no finance concurrence would be

      (ii)     In case of increase in quantity of an individual items by more
               than 25% of the agreement quantity is considered as
               unavoidable, the same shall be got executed by floating a fresh
               tender. If floating a fresh tender is considered not practicable,
               negotiations may be held with the existing contractor for
               arriving at reasonable rates for additional quantities in excess of
               125% of agreement quantity.

      (iii)    The limit for varying quantities for minor value items shall be
               100% (as against 25% prescribed for other items). A minor
               value item for this purpose is defined as an item whose original
               agreement value is less than 1% of the total original agreement

      (iv)     No such quantity variation limit shall apply for foundation items.

      (v)      As far as SOR items are concerned, the limit of 25% would
               apply to the value of SOR schedule as a whole and not on
               individual SOR items. However, in case of NS items, the limit of
               25% would apply on the individual items irrespective of the
               manner of quoting the rate (single percentage rate or individual
               item rate)

      (vi)     For the tenders accepted at the Zonal Railways level, the
               variation in the quantities will be approved by the authority in
               whose powers the revised value of the agreement lies.

      (vii)    For tenders accepted by General Manager, variations up to
               125% of the original agreement value (even if the revised
               agreement value is beyond GM’s competence to accept tenders)
               may be accepted by General Manager.

      (viii)   For tenders accepted by Board Members and Railway Ministers,
               variations up to 110% of the original agreement value may be
               accepted by General Manager.

      (ix)   The aspect of vitiation of tender with respect to variation in
             quantities should be checked and avoided.

10.   This issues with the concurrence of Finance Directorate of Ministry of

      Please acknowledge the receipt.

                                                                   (T. Gupta)
                                            Executive Director Civil Engg.(G)
                                                             Railway Board.

                          POLICY LETTER NO.RB/CE-I/6/2006

                                 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
                                 MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
                                   (RAILWAY BOARD)

           No.94/CE-I/CT/4                      New Delhi, dated 23.11.2006

           Sub : Clarification regarding minimum technical eligibility criterion in
                 Works Tenders.
           Ref : (i) Railway Board’s letter No. 94/CE-I/CT/4 dated 17.10.2002
                  (ii) Railway Board’s letter No. 94/CE-I/CT/4 dated 4.6.2003
                 (iii) Railway Board’s letter No. 94/CE-I/CT/4 dated 21.6.2006.

        Minimum technical eligibility criterion for open tenders costing more
than Rs.10 lakhs had been stipulated vide Item 2 of clause of the
letter referred at (i) above. It was subsequently modified vide letter referred
at (ii) above. Now in supersession of the letter referred at (iii) above,
following clarifications are issued in regard to interpretation of the minimum
technical eligibility criterion.

   (i)        Similar nature of work physically completed within the qualifying
              period i.e. the last 3 financial years and current financial year
              (even though the work might have commenced before the
              qualifying period) should only be considered in evaluating the
              eligibility criteria.

   (ii)       The total value of similar nature of work completed during the
              qualifying period and not the payments received within qualifying
              period alone, should be considered.

              In case, the final bill of similar nature of work has not been passed
              and final measurements have not been recorded, the paid amount
              including statutory deduction is to be considered. If final
              measurements have been recorded and work has been completed
              with negative variation, then also the paid amount including
              statutory deduction is to be considered.

              However, if final measurements have been recorded and work has
              been completed with positive variation but variation has not been
              sanctioned, original agreement value or last sanctioned agreement
              value whichever is lower should be considered for judging eligibility.

   (iii)      In the case of composite works involving combination of different
              works, even separate completed works of required value should be
              considered while evaluating the eligibility criteria.

       For example, in a tender for bridge work where similar nature of
       work has been defined as bridge work with pile foundation and PSC
       superstructure, a tenderer, who has completed one bridge work
       with pile foundation of value at least equal to 35% of the tender
       value and also has completed one bridge work with PSC
       superstructure of value at least equal to 35% of the tender value,
       should be considered as having fulfilled the eligibility criterion of
       having completed single similar nature of work.

(iv)   Similar nature of works should be clearly defined by the PHODs on
       open line and nominated Chief Engineer/CSTE/CEE on construction
       organization of the Zonal Railways and it should be strictly followed
       and the same should be indicated in the NIT/tender document also.
       In case of any deviation/modification in the list of similar nature of
       works, prior approval of competent authority should be obtained.

       This issues with the concurrence of Finance Directorate.

                                    EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CIVIL ENGG (G)

1    In a decoy check on 16.04.08 at the office premises of Divisional
     Railway Manager/APDJ, one J.A. grade officer was apprehended while
     accepting a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty thousand) from the
     representative of a Supplier (decoy) in presence of independent
     witnesses of the check.

2.   In a special drive conducted at PRS/GHY against the touting activities
     on 06.04.08 one tout was apprehended and on being checked one
     cancelled PNR, 2 nos. filled up Requisition slip for different persons,
     trains and dates of journey, one blank Requisition slip, one money
     receipt and cash amount Rs.2,710/- etc. were recovered. During
     interrogation, apprehended person disclosed that he took Rs.20/- to
     30/- from each passenger for extending to them his favours. He was
     handed over to the IPF/GHY for necessary actions vide their case no.
     29/08 U/S 143 of Rly. Act dated 06.04.08.

3.   Checks in connection with the transportation of pig consignments to
     Dimapur station by VPs from NR, NC and NE Railway during the period
     from 25.03.08 to 07.04.08 revealed that the forwarding stations were
     still booking the pig consignments to the previous maximum limits of
     105 pigs instead of to new stipulations for 50 pigs. The originating
     Railways have been advised to enforce the new stipulations.
     Undercharges amounting to Rs.4, 48,582/- have been collected against
     the overloading. The SDGMs of the said originating Railways have been
     advised to take sternest retributive measures against staff responsible
     for allowing overloading.

4.   A goods rake containing sugar, initially booked for NGC from UGR was
     intercepted at Dalkhola and Rangapani in two parts for which total
     undercharges amounting to Rs.13,24,934/- due to difference of train
     load and wagon load rate, D/C Rs.11,19,600/- and W/C Rs.3,43,000/-
     collected at the above two stations. It transpired that earlier, such
     interception in 2 parts followed by recoupling & “pushing” to original
     destination at the convenience of the consignees used to be not too
     uncommon a feature; when even changing at wagon load rates were
     not enforced. This used to be done apparently for the convenience of
     traders to control the market at the destination, while avoiding
     exposure by the glare of FOIS in arbitrary “dropping” of loads mid-way.

5.   During preventive check conducted at KIR Goods office on 21.04.08 by
     a team of HQ Vigilance, it was detected that one goods rake (sugar)
     consisting of 40 BCN wagons was initially booked for KNE from SLI but
     the rake was split up into two parts. One part of 15 wagons was placed
     at KIR and rest 25 wagons were placed at KNE station. The rake was
     booked in train load facility but due to split up of the rake, load is to be
     treated as wagon load for which undercharges amounting to Rs.

      4,08,927/- at KIR and Rs.7,85,183/- at KNE were raised and DAR
      action against the defaulting staff are being initiated.

6.    During preventive check at the unit of SSE/Tele/Con/KIR, it was found
      that on the strength of defective Indemnity Bond & prior to receipt of
      the RDSO inspection certificate, concerned SSE had received and re-
      issued the telecom materials amounting to Rs.1,01,99,693/- to
      contractor for execution of work. CA was framed with a condition that
      materials should be supplied to SSE/Tele/Con/NJP which was
      subsequently changed to SSE/Tele/Con/KIR, without ensuring any
      financial implication which amounted to an advantage given to firm. In
      addition, materials valuing Rs.1,01,99,693 was issued to firm without
      obtaining firm’s demand/requisition. Case is under investigation to fix
      up the responsibility for the irregularities.

7.    Constant Vigilance checks have yielded recovery of outstanding loans &
      interest amounting to Rs.13,52,500/- against Motor cycle advance due
      to non submission of purchase and other related documents by the
      defaulting staff. Besides the above recovery DAR action is also being
      initiated by the concerned Disciplinary authorities against defaulting
      staff on the advice of Vigilance.

8.    During preventive checks in execution of contractual works, savings
      were made due to detection of excess payment to the contractor vis-a-
      vis less execution of work. The earning/saving achieved against
      execution of works during the month of April 2008 for drives at
      SE/Elect/P/CPK areas of N.F.Railway was Rs.4,79,379/-.

9.    Preventive check was conducted at Binnaguri station revealed that
      total 4664.47 MT Dolomite lying stacked near Goods shed without
      indent for the said consignments. Total outstanding W/C calculated by
      SM/BNV was Rs.36, 42,360/-. SS/BNV, Sr.DCM/APDJ as well as
      FA&CAO/MLG have been advised for early realization of the
      outstanding dues. Major penalty DAR action is being contemplated
      against SS/BNV.

10.   An intensive drive made in the unit of SSE/Power/ NBQ revealed non-
      realization of the energy consumption bill against various outsiders
      amounting to Rs.24,51,833.00.

11.   A preventive check was conducted at RRB/GHY, whereby it was
      suspected that a candidate for the post of H&MI/Gr.III had
      impersonated during written examination. Accordingly the candidate’s
      specimen handwriting as appearing in his application form, attendance
      register and OMR were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Guwahati,
      Assam for getting the expert’s opinion. After the necessary tests the
      Forensic Laboratory has confirmed that the handwriting as appearing in

      the application and that appearing in the attendance register and OMR
      sheets are not different persons.
      Based on above findings, Chairman, RRB/GHY has been asked to take
      necessary action for cancellation of the said candidate’s candidature,
      arrange to lodge FIR against the candidate.

12.   During the course of a preventive check conducted in three of the
      railway hospitals it was detected that supply of medicine has been
      made by tampering with the Purchase Orders issued by CMD’s office.
      While CMD/N.F.Rly. has been requested to alert the in-charges of all
      the divisional hospitals for cross-checking on a drive basis, the
      attested/unattested photo copies of the POs available with them with
      the original POs at CMD’s office by 20.02.08, a system improvement for
      generation of the different copies of the POs has been advised to

      FA & CAO/N.F.Railway has also been advised that the bills for supply of
      medicines should be released only if the name of the Manufacturer,
      Brand further investigation.

13.   Based on source information a decoy check was conducted at booking
      office/NMZ on 22.02.08. During the course of check one Hd.CC/NMZ
      was apprehended while demanding and accepting Rs.24/- excess from
      the actual fare for issuing of 2 numbers of IInd Mail/Exp. PCTs Ex.NMZ
      to DLI. The staff concerned was put under suspension and major
      penalty DAR action is being processed against him.

14.   On receipt of source information that ECRC/HKD had mis-appropriated
      huge amount of Govt. money by the way of short depositing of daily
      PRS earnings. In this connection a drive was organized at PRS/HKD
      and an amount of Rs.3,94,962/- (Govt. cash) was detected as mis-
      appropriated by one ECRC/HKD during the period from Oct/07 to
      Jan/08. The said ECRC/HKD had earlier also been identified for
      malpractices during his posting at DMV and had thereby been ordered
      for transfer to HKD. The case is under final stage of investigation.

15.   Owing to in-motion weigh bridge at JPZ and NBQ, being out of order
      for a prolonged spell special drive was conducted to detect overloading
      in out ward coal rakes by weighment at Rangapani (RNI) weigh bridge
      on 27.02.08 and 28.02.08. Total 13 Nos. rakes found over loaded.
      Accordingly an amount of Rs.3,31,837/- was raised as undercharges
      against the destination Railways

16.   In the unit of SSE/Power/KIR, energy consumption bills against various
      vendors in the KIR station premises were unpaid since last 1 year. A
      joint check on the realization of energy charges against various
      vendors at KIR station revealed an unpaid amount of Rs. 16,16,942/-.

17.   While conducting preventive checks in one of the Divisions and
      Workshop respectively an amount of Rs. 4,92,763/- has been detected
      as irregular payments on account of non-regularization of leave sick
      and absent periods. The amount so detected is being recovered.
      Instructions have, however, been issued to minimize the incidence of
      irregular payments. Erring staff are being taken up under DAR for such

18.   During preventive check at the unit of SE/Con/Signal/KIR under
      Dy.CSTE/Con/KIR at Barsoi station against work order it was detected
      that at the time of dismantling signaling scrap materials like solid rod,
      rod compensator, adjustable crank trestle etc. was released from MG
      yard, though the above materials was not included in schedule of work
      order for dismantling the same. Thus total 21.784 MT of scrap
      materials were found unaccounted for, amounting Rs. 3,15,868/-
      (aprox). Concerned official has been advised to account for the same
      with intimation to this office. Case is under investigation.