21 OCT, 2011, 01.30AM IST, VIKAS DHOOT & DEVIKA BANERJI,ET BUREAU
NEW DELHI: Nandan Nilekani-led Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has recast the role and powers of its financial advisor after coming under bureaucratic sniper fire from some arms of the government, culminating in a audit by the country's top auditor.
The body tasked with issuing a unique 12-digit Aadhaar number to all Indian residents has issued orders to bring its financial advisor's role in line with government norms, which will limit the concerned official's remit to just finance, accounting and budget functions.
Until now, the financial advisor also managed administrative tasks such as authentication and updation, international cooperation and coordination with central ministries. This triggered criticism that the same official was involved in framing policies and approving funding, which meant that no independent scrutiny of proposals was possible.
UIDAI's director general Ram Sewak Sharma confirmed to ET that an "internal redistribution of duties has been made recently", but noted that "the current administrative structure is in consonance" with relevant government rules.
"Within the ambit of extant Government of India instructions, the financial adviser was involved in the key processes/ activities of UIDAI which have financial dimensions, which includes policy/ programme formulation," he said.
Set up in 2009 under the charge of former Infosys boss Nilekani, the UIDAI has of late seen aspects of its functioning questioned and having to answer questions of duplication of expenditure.
Some of the authority's plans raised the hackles of the home and the finance ministries and most recently, also the Planning Commission, to which it is attached. Last month, the Commission questioned the UIDAI's administrative structure and asked for an independent financial advisor to monitor its finances and spending. Being involved in administrative tasks, the Commission had said, "takes away the benefit of an independent scrutiny of proposals by an arms' length" financial advisor. The Commission has also claimed that while it is accountable to Parliament for the authority's expenditure, it has not been kept in the loop by the UIDAI.
The brouhaha over the UIDAI's functions caught the attention of the Comptroller and Auditor General, which earlier this month initiated what it calls a "pilot" performance audit of its operations and finances aimed at ascertaining whether the UIDAI has, as is expected of all government departments, achieved its intended outcomes at the lowest possible costs.
The UIDAI has so far enrolled 10 crore people, for which a cabinet panel has approved spending of 3,023 crore. In May this year, the UIDAI proposed enrolling the entire population at a cost of 14840.89 crore, which was rejected by the finance ministry last month.
A CAG official said while the UIDAI audit was part of its annual plan, the timing had been advanced because of the risk perception. "We initiated the process after we considered the audit risk involved," said the official, adding that the risk in UIDAI's case was enhanced by recent reports about duplication of expenditure and questions raised by several government departments about some of the authority's decisions.
Audit risk is a factor relied upon by the CAG to determine which offices need to be audited on a priority basis. A pilot audit is deployed by the CAG to determine whether an organisation requires a full-fledged probe.
The body tasked with issuing a unique 12-digit Aadhaar number to all Indian residents has issued orders to bring its financial advisor's role in line with government norms, which will limit the concerned official's remit to just finance, accounting and budget functions.
Until now, the financial advisor also managed administrative tasks such as authentication and updation, international cooperation and coordination with central ministries. This triggered criticism that the same official was involved in framing policies and approving funding, which meant that no independent scrutiny of proposals was possible.
UIDAI's director general Ram Sewak Sharma confirmed to ET that an "internal redistribution of duties has been made recently", but noted that "the current administrative structure is in consonance" with relevant government rules.
"Within the ambit of extant Government of India instructions, the financial adviser was involved in the key processes/ activities of UIDAI which have financial dimensions, which includes policy/ programme formulation," he said.
Set up in 2009 under the charge of former Infosys boss Nilekani, the UIDAI has of late seen aspects of its functioning questioned and having to answer questions of duplication of expenditure.
Some of the authority's plans raised the hackles of the home and the finance ministries and most recently, also the Planning Commission, to which it is attached. Last month, the Commission questioned the UIDAI's administrative structure and asked for an independent financial advisor to monitor its finances and spending. Being involved in administrative tasks, the Commission had said, "takes away the benefit of an independent scrutiny of proposals by an arms' length" financial advisor. The Commission has also claimed that while it is accountable to Parliament for the authority's expenditure, it has not been kept in the loop by the UIDAI.
The brouhaha over the UIDAI's functions caught the attention of the Comptroller and Auditor General, which earlier this month initiated what it calls a "pilot" performance audit of its operations and finances aimed at ascertaining whether the UIDAI has, as is expected of all government departments, achieved its intended outcomes at the lowest possible costs.
The UIDAI has so far enrolled 10 crore people, for which a cabinet panel has approved spending of 3,023 crore. In May this year, the UIDAI proposed enrolling the entire population at a cost of 14840.89 crore, which was rejected by the finance ministry last month.
A CAG official said while the UIDAI audit was part of its annual plan, the timing had been advanced because of the risk perception. "We initiated the process after we considered the audit risk involved," said the official, adding that the risk in UIDAI's case was enhanced by recent reports about duplication of expenditure and questions raised by several government departments about some of the authority's decisions.
Audit risk is a factor relied upon by the CAG to determine which offices need to be audited on a priority basis. A pilot audit is deployed by the CAG to determine whether an organisation requires a full-fledged probe.
