Report of the

Comptroller and Auditor General of India

on
Local Bodies
for the year ended 31 March 2017

Government of Andhra Pradesh

Report No. 6 of 2018
 Table of Contents

Reference to
Paragraph Page
Preface v
Overview vii

Part – A
Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department
Chapter I An overview of the functioning and financial reporting of
Panchayat Raj Institutions
An overview of the functioning of the Section-A 1
Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs) in the State
Accountability Framework and Financial Reporting Section-B 7
issues
Chapter II Compliance Audit

Land Management in Panchayat Raj Institutions 2.1 13

Avoidable additional charges of `65.77 lakh 2.2 25

Part – B
Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department

Chapter III An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues on

Urban Local Bodies
An Overview of the functioning of the Section-A 27
Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) in the State
Accountability Framework and Financial Reporting Section-B 33
issues
Chapter IV Performance Audit
Tirupati Municipal Corporation 4 37

Page i
 Reference to
Paragraph Page
Chapter V Compliance Audit

Construction and Maintenance of Internal Roads in

5.1 53
ULBs

Wasteful expenditure of `2.35 crore 5.2 63

Avoidable cost overrun and infructuous expenditure 5.3 64

Avoidable expenditure - `77.91 lakh 5.4 65

Infructuous expenditure of `29.91 crore 5.5 66

Unfruitful expenditure of `1.97crore 5.6 68

Page ii
 Appendices
Appendix Reference to
Subject
No. Paragraph Page
1.1 Statement showing district-wise and department-
1.3 71
wise devolution of funds to PRIs during 2016-17
2.1 Statement showing the assets held by Zilla Praja
2.1.4.1 72
Parishad
2.2 Statement showing the assets held by Mandal
2.1.4.1 72
Praja Parishad
2.3 Statement showing the lands held by Gram
2.1.4.1 73
Panchayats
2.4 Statement showing the ZPP land alienated to
Government Departments/Government 2.1.4.3 75
Organizations
2.5 Statement showing the details of layouts in Gram
2.1.4.4 (i) 76
Panchayats
2.6 Statement showing details of Zilla Parishad wise
2.2 78
late payment charges
4.1 Statement showing the details of year-wise budget
4.4 79
estimates and actual receipt/expenditure
4.2 Statement showing the details of cases of delay in
bringing the Properties into Property Tax net after 4.5.1.2 80
completion of constructions
4.3 Statement showing the details of non-revision of
Property Tax with reference to permission under 4.5.1.4 (1) 85
BPS
4.4 Statement showing the details of cases wherein the
plinth areas as per PT assessment are higher than 4.5.1.4 (1) 86
that of BPS
4.5 Statement showing the details of BPS cases for
which house number were not traced out in PT 4.5.1.4 (2) 87
data
4.6 Statement showing the details of shops vacant for
4.7.1 88
long period in shopping complexes
4.7 Statement showing the details of non-collection of
4.8.2 (i) 88
Open Space Contribution charges

Page iii
4.8 Statement showing the details of non-collection of
4.8.2 (ii) 89
Betterment charges
4.9 Statement showing the details of short collection
4.8.2 (iii) 89
of development charges
4.10 Statement showing the details of short collection
4.8.3 90
of Labour Cess
4.11 Statement showing avoidable expenditure on
4.10.2.1(i) 92
Current Consumption Charges
4.12 Statement showing the expenditure incurred over
and above the expected number of units of 4.10.2.1(ii) 92
consumption
5.1 (a) Statement showing the details of split works
5.1.5.1 93
costing above `50 lakh
5.1 (b) Statement showing the details of split works
5.1.5.1 94
costing above `10 lakh
5.2 Statement showing the delay in concluding
5.1.5.4 (1) 95
agreement
5.3 Statement showing the delay in completion of
5.1.5.4 (2) 95
works
5.4 List of works for which agreements were
5.1.5.4 (2) 99
concluded but not commenced
5.5 Service Tax payment details of Tuni Municipality 5.4 101

Glossary of abbreviations 103

Page iv
 Preface
This report for the year ended 31st March 2017 has been prepared for
submission to the Governor of Andhra Pradesh under the CAG’s DPC Act,
1971 for being laid before the Legislature of the State.
The Report contains significant results of the audit of the Panchayat Raj
Institutions and Urban Local Bodies in the State including departments
concerned.
The issues noticed in the course of test audit for the period 2016-17 as well as
those issues which came to notice in earlier years, but could not be dealt with
in the previous Reports have also been included, wherever necessary.
This Report includes one Performance Audit on ‘Tirupati Municipal
Corporation’ and eight Compliance Audit Paragraphs including two detailed
Compliance Audit Paragraphs on ‘Land Management in Panchayat Raj
Institutions’ and ‘Construction and maintenance of Internal Roads in Urban
Local Bodies’.
The audit has been conducted in conformity with Auditing Standards issued by
the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

Page v
Overview
 Overview

Overview
Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs) and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) fall under Panchayat
Raj and Rural Development (PR&RD) and Municipal Administration and Urban
Development (MA&UD) departments respectively. The Audit Reports on Local
Bodies have been presented to the State Legislature since March 2008. However,
discussions have not taken place in the State Legislature. Explanatory notes were not
received to any of the paragraphs and reviews included in the above Audit Reports.
This Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (C&AG) on Government
of Andhra Pradesh includes results of one Performance Audit, two detailed Compliance
Audit paragraphs and six compliance audit paragraphs of PRIs and ULBs. These are
as follows:
• Performance Audit on ‘Tirupati Municipal Corporation’
• Detailed Compliance Audit paragraphs on ‘Land management in Panchayat Raj
Institutions’ and ‘Construction and maintenance of Internal roads in Urban
Local Bodies’
• Compliance Audit Paragraphs
An overview of the significant audit observations is given below:
An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of Panchayat
Raj Institutions
Director, State Audit noted that an amount of `19.09 crore was recoverable by
District Vigilance Cell, however, an amount of `0.12 crore only was recovered (as of
March 2017) leaving a balance of `18.97 crore.
(Paragraph 1.10.2 (ii))
Misappropriation cases (646) involving an amount of `seven crore noticed by
Director, State Audit were pending clearance as of March 2017.
(Paragraph 1.13.3)
Performance audit on Tirupati Municipal Corporation

Introduction

Tirupati is a major pilgrim city located in Chittoor district of Andhra Pradesh.

Tirupati Municipality was upgraded as Tirupati Municipal Corporation (TMC) in
March 2007. TMC is spread over an area of 27.44 Sq.km. The population of TMC
was 3.74 lakh as per 2011 Census. TMC is responsible for provision of civic
amenities and infrastructure facilities in the Corporation area. Functioning of
TMC is governed by Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1994.
Performance Audit of TMC in six selected areas (Property Tax, Building Permission
Fee, Trade License Fee, Rents from shopping complexes, Drainage system and

Page vii
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Street lighting) was carried out covering the period 2012-13 to 2016-17. The
overview of audit findings is given below:
• Tirupati Municipal Corporation had no comprehensive database of all assessable
properties. TMC has not done the Geographic Information System (GIS)
mapping of the properties for effective realization of Property Tax (PT). Thus,
there was scope for un-assessed properties.
(Paragraph 4.5.1.1)
• Delay in bringing the properties under PT net after completion of construction
resulted in loss of revenue of `1.18 crore.
(Paragraph 4.5.1.2)
• TMC failed to remit Library Cess of `1.38 crore to Zilla Grandhalaya Samstha
(ZGS) for the purpose of providing better library facilities to the public.
(Paragraph 4.5.1.8)
• TMC realized an amount of `21.04 crore towards Education Tax during the
period 2012-17. However, the same was not remitted to Government account in
violation of the Act provisions.
(Paragraphs 4.5.1.9)
• An amount of `2.27 crore towards Open Space Contribution was not collected by
the TMC while according building permissions.
(Paragraphs 4.8.1 (i))
• Incomplete Storm Water Drainage Project resulted in unfruitful expenditure of
`30.17 crore besides non-availment of GoI assistance of `13.47 crore.
(Paragraph 4.9.3.1)
Compliance audit paragraphs

Land Management in Panchayat Raj Institutions

Compliance Audit of ‘Land management in Panchayat Raj Institutions’ was carried

out in seven Zilla Praja Parishads, 35 Mandal Praja Parishads and 70 Gram
Panchayats for the period 2014-17. The overview of audit findings is given below:
• All the test-checked Zilla Praja Parishads and Mandal Praja Parishads did not
maintain asset registers containing the details such as location of the land, survey
number, actual extent of land, cost of the land, etc.
(Paragraph 2.1.4.1)
• Open space measuring 207.63 acres valuing `60.30 crore was not transferred to
the concerned Gram Panchayats by the layout developers.
(Paragraph 2.1.4.4 (i))

Page viii
 Overview

• Zilla Praja Parishad, Guntur allowed utilization of its land by a private agency to
operate toll plaza without claiming the rental charges resulting in loss of revenue
of `1.50 crore as of March 2017.
(Paragraph 2.1.5.1 (i))
Construction and maintenance of internal roads in Urban Local Bodies
Compliance Audit of Construction and maintenance of internal roads was carried
out in 11 ULBs for the period 2014-17. The overview of audit findings is given below:
• An amount of `8.02 crore was released under 14th Finance Commission grants
towards 97 road works in test-checked ULBs. However, a meagre sum of
`0.06 crore was only utilised.
(Paragraph 5.1.4.3)
• Expenditure of `38.15 lakh incurred on the construction of bridge connecting SC
colony and burial ground became unfruitful due to non-construction of approach
roads.
(Paragraph 5.1.5.5)
• Road cutting and restoration charges amounting to `94.61 lakh were not collected
by Nandyal municipality from service provider for laying of optical fibre cable.
(Paragraph 5.1.5.7)
Wasteful expenditure of `2.35 crore

Failure of Pulivendula Municipality to ensure source of continuous water supply to

the swimming pool resulted in wasteful expenditure of `2.35 crore.
(Paragraph 5.2)
Infructuous expenditure of `29.91 crore

Failure of the department to ensure adoption of approved designs by the contractor

resulted in infructuous expenditure of `29.91 crore.
(Paragraph 5.5)
Unfruitful expenditure of `1.97crore

Failure of Pulivendula municipality to install water meters in households resulted in

unfruitful expenditure of `1.97 crore. The objective of minimizing wastage and
economic pricing of water was not achieved.
(Paragraph 5.6)

Page ix
 Part - A
Panchayat Raj Institutions
 Chapter – I
An overview of the functioning and financial
reporting issues of Panchayat Raj Institutions

Pages 1-11
 Chapter I - An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of
Panchayat Raj Institutions

Chapter I
Section A
An overview of the functioning of the
Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs) in the State
1.1 Introduction
Government of India (GoI) enacted (1992) 73rd amendment to the Constitution to
empower Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs) as local self-governing institutions to
ensure a more participative governing structure in the country. Accordingly, State
Government enacted Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj (APPR) Act in 1994 and repealed
all the earlier Acts, to establish a three-tier system viz., Gram Panchayat (GP), Mandal
Praja Parishad (MPP) and Zilla Praja Parishad (ZPP) at Village, Mandal and District
levels respectively. The profile of the PRIs of the State is given in Table 1.1
Table 1.1

Indicator Unit State statistics

Area Sq.km. 1,62,970
Mandal/ Tehsil Number 660
Villages Number 17,366
Total population (Census 2011) Crore 4.96
Rural population Crore 3.50
Rural sex ratio Females per 1000 Males 994
Density Persons per Sq. Km 220
Rural literacy rate Percentage 62.37
Male literacy rate Percentage 70.48
Female literacy rate Percentage 54.25
Scheduled Caste population Percentage 17.08
Scheduled Tribe population Percentage 5.53
Zilla Praja Parishads Number 13
Mandal Praja Parishads Number 660
Gram Panchayats Number 12,920
Source: Information furnished (August 2017) by Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural
Development (CPR&RD) and Andhra Pradesh at a Glance published (2016-17) by
Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Andhra Pradesh

Page 1
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

1.2 Organisational set-up of PRIs

Organisational arrangements for the PRIs are as follows:

Principal Secretary
Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department

Commissioner
Panchayat Raj and Rural Development

Chief Executive Officer

Zilla Praja Parishad
(District Level)

Mandal Parishad Development Officer

Mandal Praja Parishad
(Mandal Level)

Panchayat Secretary
Gram Panchayat
(Village Level)

Elections to the PRIs at all the tiers were last conducted in April/May 2014. The elected
members of ZPP, MPP and GP were headed by Chairperson, President and Sarpanch
respectively. They convene and preside over the meetings of standing committees and
General Body.
1.3 Functioning of PRIs
Eleventh Schedule to 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992, lists 29 subjects for
devolution to strengthen the PRIs. During 2007-08, State Government devolved
101 functions to PRIs and thereafter, no functions were devolved. Funds relating to
devolved functions were released to PRIs through concerned line departments. During
2016-17, only three line departments released funds amounting to `95.78 crore to PRIs
in 11 out of 13 districts. Out of this, `53.70 crore was expended (Appendix- 1.1).

1
(i) Agriculture and Agriculture Extension (ii) Animal Husbandry, Dairy and Poultry (iii) Fisheries
(iv) Health and Sanitation (v) Education, including Primary, Secondary and Adult Education and
non-formal education (vi) Drinking Water (vii) Poverty Alleviation Programme (viii) Women and
Child Development (ix) Social Welfare, including Welfare of the Handicapped and Mentally retarded
and (x) Welfare of the Weaker Sections and in particular of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes

Page 2
 Chapter I - An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of
Panchayat Raj Institutions

1.4 Formation of various committees

As per the provisions of APPR Act, 1994, various committees were to be constituted at
ZPP, MPP and GP level. At ZPP level seven2 standing committees were to be
constituted to monitor the progress of implementation of works and schemes related to
subjects assigned to them. Functional Committees3 at MPP and GP were to be
constituted to monitor the progress of implementation of works and schemes. During
the year 2016-17, functional committees were not constituted in respect of 114 out of
20 test-checked GPs. Similarly, functional committee was not constituted in one
(Rajamahendravaram) out of 20 test-checked MPPs.
The State was empowered5 to constitute a District Planning Committee (DPC) at district
level. This was to ensure that each Panchayat in the district prepares a development
plan for the financial year. This plan was to be consolidated into the District
Development Plan (DDP) and to be submitted to the Government for incorporation into
the State plan. Out of test-checked 20 GPs, it was observed that nine6 GPs had not
prepared the development plan.
1.5 Sources of funds
Resource base of PRI consists of:
i. Own revenue generated by collection of tax7
ii. Non-tax8 revenues
iii. Devolution at the instance of State and Central Finance Commissions, Central and
State Government grants for maintenance and development purposes
iv. Other receipts9
Summary of receipts of PRIs for the years 2012-17 is given below. Receipts for the
period 2012-14 pertain to the composite State whereas the receipts for the period
2014-17 pertain to the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh.

2
(i) Planning and Finance (ii) Rural Development (iii) Agriculture (iv) Education and Medical Service
(v) Women Welfare (vi) Social Welfare and (vii) Works
3
for Agriculture, Public Health, Water Supply, Sanitation, Family Planning, Education and
Communication
4
One GP of Anantapuramu, One GP of Srikakulam, One GP of Vishakhapatnam, four GPs of
Prakasam and four GPs of East Godavari districts
5
Article 243ZD of the Constitution of India
6
One GP of Visakhapatnam, five GPs of Prakasam and three GPs of East Godavari districts
7
Property Tax, Advertisement Fee, etc.
8
Water tax, Rents from markets, shops and other properties, auction proceeds etc.
9
Donations, interest on deposits, etc.

Page 3
 Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Table 1.2
(` in crore)
Sl. No. Receipts 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
1 Own Revenue 976.50 736.50 306.31* 204.17 279.74
10
2 Assigned Revenue 154.36 457.24 1,137.12# 364.31 74.27
3 State Government Grants 343.97 350.59 136.78 182.67 195.07
4 GoI Grants 1,201.03 1,330.86 21.86 735.55 985.02
5 Other Receipts 84.18 NA** NA** 322.05 328.62
Total 2,760.04 2,875.19 1,602.07 1,808.75 1,862.72
Source: Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development
* Data pertains to 12 ZPPs, MPPs of 9 districts and GPs of 13 districts
# Data pertains to 11 ZPPs, MPPs of 8 districts and GPs of 13 districts
** Data not made available to audit despite specific requests
1.5.1 Financial assistance to PRIs
The quantum of financial assistance provided by State Government to PRIs by way of
grants and loans for the years 2012-14 pertaining to the composite State and for 2014-17
pertaining to the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh is given below:
Table 1.3
(` in crore)
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
Budget 329.27 328.89 214.68 128.45 292.32
Actual Release 158.10 164.57 106.39 128.45 284.18
Expenditure 98.20 114.85 116.04 NA 274.26
Source: Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development
NA Data not made available to audit despite specific requests
1.5.2 Application of funds
Summary of expenditure incurred by PRIs for the years 2012-14 pertaining to the
composite State of Andhra Pradesh and 2014-17 pertaining to the residuary State of
Andhra Pradesh is given below:
Table 1.4
(` in crore)
Type of Expenditure 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
Revenue 1,405.50 3,562.39 1,021.72* 5,122.59 2,371.06$
Capital 1,033.47 1,756.98 700.27# 625.04 285.11$$
Total 2,438.97 5,319.37 1,721.99 5,747.63 2,656.17
* Data pertains to 12 ZPPs, MPPs of 9 districts and GPs of Krishna district
# Data pertains to 11 ZPPs, MPPs of 7 districts and GPs of Krishna district
$ Data pertains to 2 ZPPs, 1 MPP and GPs of 4 districts
$$ Data pertains to 3 ZPPs, 2 MPP and 3 GPs

10
Seigniorage fee and surcharge on stamp duty collected by Departments of Mines and Geology and
Stamps and Registration are apportioned to Local Bodies in the form of assigned revenue

Page 4
 Chapter I - An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of
Panchayat Raj Institutions

1.6 Recommendations of State Finance Commission (SFC)

As per Article 243-I of the Constitution of India and Section 235 of APPR Act 1994,
SFC has to be constituted once in five years to recommend devolution of funds from
the State Government to Local bodies. State Government did not constitute SFC after
Third SFC (2003). The Committee of Ministers and Secretaries felt that
recommendations of Third Finance Commission could be applied for the period from
2010 to 2015 also. Department stated that during 2016-17, State Government released
`166.86 crore to PRIs of the State and entire amount was spent as of August 2017.

1.7 Recommendations of the Central Finance Commission (CFC)

1.7.1 Fourteenth Finance Commission (FFC)
The Fourteenth Finance Commission (FFC) recommended assured transfer of funds to
the local bodies for planning and delivering basic services11. Grants are released under
two components i.e., Basic Grant and Performance Grant in the ratio of 90:10.
GoI released `1,454.06 crore during the year 2016-17. Department stated that entire
amount released was expended as of August 2017.
1.8 Audit mandate
1.8.1 Primary Auditor
Director, State Audit (DSA), functioning under the administrative control of Finance
Department, is the statutory auditor for PRIs under Andhra Pradesh State Audit
Act, 1989. As per Section 11(2) of the Act, DSA is required to prepare annual
Consolidated Audit and Review Report for presentation to the State Legislature. DSA
has four Regional offices and 13 District offices in the State. As per Section 10 of the
Act, DSA is empowered to initiate proceedings against the persons responsible for
causing loss to the funds of local authorities. Such amounts are to be recovered by the
executive authority concerned under Revenue Recovery (RR) Act.
As per information furnished (October 2017) by DSA, audit of the accounts of one ZPP,
13 MPPs and 247 GPs was in arrears. DSA attributed delay in audit of accounts to non-
production of records by the concerned PRIs. As of March 2017, 4,479 Surcharge
Certificates12 for `7.79 crore were issued. However, an amount of `14,000 only was
recovered in one case upto March 2017. Recovery of meagre amount indicated that the
concerned executive authorities had been lax to implement Act provisions against the
persons causing loss of the funds of PRIs.

11
water supply, sanitation including septic management, sewage and solid waste management, storm
water drainage, maintenance of community assets, maintenance of roads, footpaths, street lighting,
burial and cremation grounds
12
Surcharge is an extra payment of money in addition to the usual payment. Director of State Audit
may disallow every item of expenditure incurred contrary to law and surcharge the same on the person
incurring or authorising the incurring of such expenditure. Surcharge certificate means the certificate
by which the charge or the liability of a surchargee is communicated.

Page 5
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

The Consolidated Audit and Review Report for the year 2011-12 was tabled in the State
Legislature in March 2016. DSA stated (October 2017) that consolidation of Report
for the year 2012-13 was under progress. DSA attributed the reasons for delay in
consolidation of reports to non-availability of sufficient staff after bifurcation of the
State. Some of the major findings observed in 2011-12 report relate to excess
utilisation/non-utilisation/diversion/mis-utilisation of grants, non-collection of taxes
and fee, advances pending adjustment, etc.
1.8.2 Audit by Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG)
Based on the recommendations of the Eleventh Finance Commission, State
Government entrusted (August 2004) CAG with the responsibility for providing
Technical Guidance and Supervision (TGS) in connection with the accounts and audit
of Local Bodies under Section 20(1) of the CAG’s (DPC) Act.
Based on test check of PRIs, a TGS note was prepared at the end of each financial year
and forwarded to the DSA for improving the quality of their reports. TGS note for the
year 2016-17 was issued in August 2017.
Planning and conduct of audit
The Audit process commences with assessment of the risk13 based on the following
parameters:
i. Expenditure incurred
ii. Criticality/complexity of activities
iii. Priority accorded to the activity by Government
iv. Level of delegated financial powers
v. Assessment of internal controls and
vi. Concerns of stakeholders.
Previous audit findings were also considered in this exercise. Based on this risk
assessment, frequency and extent of audit was decided and an annual audit plan was
formulated to conduct audit. During 2016-17, 44 PRIs (four ZPPs, 20 MPPs and
20 GPs), falling under the department of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, were
covered in audit.
Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Local Bodies for the year
ended March 2016 was tabled in the State Legislature on 31 March 2017.
1.9 Response to Audit observations
After completion of audit, Inspection Reports (IRs) containing audit findings were
issued to the Head of the unit concerned. Heads of offices and next higher authorities
were required to respond to the observations contained in IRs within one month and
take appropriate corrective action. Audit observations communicated in IRs were also
discussed in meetings at district level by officers of the departments with officers of
Principal Accountant General’s office.

13
of department/local body/scheme/programme, etc.

Page 6
 Chapter I - An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of
Panchayat Raj Institutions

As of November 2017, 240 IRs containing 1,842 paragraphs pertaining to the period up
to 2016-17 were pending settlement as given below. Of these, initial replies had not
been received in respect of 48 IRs and 649 paragraphs.
Table 1.5
Year Number of IRs /Paragraphs IRs/Paragraphs where even
initial replies have not been
received
IRs Paragraphs IRs Paragraphs
Up to 2015-16 216 1,421 24 228
2016-17 24 421 24 421
Total 240 1,842 48 649

Lack of action on IRs was fraught with the risk of perpetuating serious financial and
other irregularities pointed out in these reports remaining unaddressed.

Section B
Accountability Framework and Financial Reporting Issues
1.10 Accounting framework
1.10.1 Ombudsman
Thirteenth Finance Commission had recommended establishment of an independent
Local Body Ombudsman system. Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural
Development (CPR&RD) stated (August 2017) that no separate Ombudsman was
adopted in Andhra Pradesh. The existing AP Lokayukta Institution takes up complaints
against the functionaries and elected representatives of PRIs. Number of cases
registered district wise and their disposal was, however, not furnished by CPR&RD
despite specific request.
1.10.2 Social Audit
Social audit involves verification of implementation of programmes/schemes and
delivery of the envisaged results by the community with active involvement of primary
stakeholders. In May 2009, State Government created an independent autonomous
body called the Society for Social Audit, Accountability and Transparency (SSAAT)14.
Post bifurcation of the State of Andhra Pradesh into Telangana and Andhra Pradesh
with effect from 2 June 2014, a new Society was registered under the Andhra Pradesh
Societies Registration Act, 2001 for Andhra Pradesh. Existing Society was retained for
Telangana State. Functioning of the Society during 2016-17 showed the following:

14
The society was to carry out social audits of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee
Scheme (MGNREGS) and other anti-poverty/welfare programmes of the Department of Rural
Development

Page 7
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

i. State Government should facilitate15 conduct of Social Audit of the works taken
up under the Act16 in every Gram Panchayat at least once in six months, i.e., twice
a year. The Social Auditors are required to conduct 100 per cent check of muster
rolls and work sites. During the year 2016-17, SSAAT had carried out Social
audits of 12,97517 GPs in the State. However, only 65 GPs (0.5 per cent) were
covered twice a year. SSAAT attributed (June 2017) the shortfall in coverage of
audit to requests for postponement of audit on the grounds of elections, Janma
Bhoomi programme and diversion of staff for training.
ii. As per State Social Audit Rules, the District Vigilance Cell is responsible to take
follow up action on the social audit observations immediately (within three days)
on conclusion of the mandal social audit public hearing. During 2016-17, SSAAT
found deviations amounting to `192.96 crore. Out of this, deviations of
`111.79 crore (58 per cent) were accepted by the Presiding Officers18. An amount
of `19.09 crore was recoverable, however, an amount of `0.12 crore only was
recovered (as of March 2017) leaving a balance of `18.97 crore.
1.11 Submission of Utilization Certificates (UCs)
Scheme guidelines of Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) and Central Finance
Commissions (CFCs) stipulate that UCs should be obtained by departmental officers
from the grantees and after verification should be forwarded to GoI.
State Government forwarded UCs to GoI for `642.77 crore against the total releases of
`1,454.06 crore (up to March 2017) under Fourteenth Finance Commission Grant.
However, UCs for `811.29 crore were yet to be submitted as of August 2017. Similarly,
an amount of `166.86 crore was released (up to March 2017) under the State Finance
Commission grant. UCs were, however, not obtained till date (August 2017).
Records of 24 test-checked PRIs (20 MPPs and 4 ZPPs) showed that UCs for
`66.64 crore for the period from 2012-17 were not received from 1019 MPPs and one
ZPP20 as of March 2017.
1.12 Internal Audit and Internal Control System of PRIs
As per Section 44(2)(a) and (b) of APPR Act, 1994 Government should appoint District
Panchayat Officers, Divisional Panchayat Officers and Extension Officers as Inspecting
Officers for overseeing the operations of Gram Panchayats (GPs). As per Government
Orders21, all the district offices and their subordinate offices are required to be inspected

15
As per Section 3(1) of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Audit of Scheme
Rules, 2011
16
Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005
17
Social audit to be conducted by SSAAT = 12,920 GPs x 2 times = 25,840
18
District Programme Officer nominates a senior officer not less than the rank of the Additional District
Programme Coordinator for presiding over the public hearing
19
Akividu, Anandapuram, Chintalapudi, Mandapeta, Palakonda, Parvada, Puttaparthy, Rajole,
Samalkota and Undrajavaram
20
Machilipatnam
21
G.O. Ms. No. 247 GAD dated 08.02.1962 along with Government Memo in Circular No. 42050/AR-
III/97-7, GAD dated 26-07-1977

Page 8
 Chapter I - An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of
Panchayat Raj Institutions

by Heads of the Department periodically. Records (2016-17) of test-checked PRIs

showed that inspections were not conducted in 2022 GPs (out of 20 GPs), 1423 MPPs
(out of 20 MPPs) and two ZPPs24 (out of 4 ZPPs). The department stated (August 2017)
that inspection could not be conducted due to State re-organisation (2 June 2014) and
shifting of offices to new capital area. It was assured that action plan would be prepared
to complete the inspection as per the rules.
1.13 Maintenance of records
ZPPs and MPPs shall maintain records such as Cash book, Assets Register, Advance
Register, Stock Registers etc. as per the provisions of APPR Act, 1994. Records of
GPs are to be maintained as per GP Accounts Manual of Panchayat Raj and Rural
Development Department. However, records of 44 test-checked PRIs showed that cash
books were not properly maintained25 in eight26 MPPs and 1727 GPs.
1.13.1 Physical verification of stores and stock
Article 143 of Andhra Pradesh Financial Code (APFC) stipulates that all stores and
stock should be verified physically once a year. A certificate to this effect is to be
recorded by the Head of the Office in the register concerned. It was seen that annual
physical verification of stores and stock was not conducted in 16 PRIs (two MPPs28 and
14 GPs29) out of 44 PRIs test-checked during 2016-17.
1.13.2 Non-reconciliation of departmental figures with treasury
As per paragraph 19.6 of Andhra Pradesh Budget Manual, DDOs are required to
reconcile departmental receipts and expenditure figures with those booked in treasury
every month to avoid any misclassification and fraudulent drawals. Reconciliation in
respect of 1830 PRIs (41 per cent) out of 44 test-checked PRIs was not done since
2013-14.
1.13.3 Cases of misappropriation
Andhra Pradesh Financial Code stipulated responsibilities of Government servants in
dealing with Government money, the procedure for fixing responsibility for any loss

22
Akutotapally, Anandapuram, Bhogapuram, Chandrampalem, Darsi, Devarapaly, Dowleswaram,
Duppada, Dwarapudi, Gajapathinagaram, Gargeyapuram, Inkollu, Kumili, Lakkavarapukota,
Paravada, Parchur, Podili, Tanguturu, Terlam and Thummapala
23
Akividu, Anakapalli, Anandapuram, Cheepurupalli, Chimakurthy, Chintalapudi, Mandapeta,
Palakonda, Parvada, Puttaparthy, Rajamahendravaram, Rajole, Samalkota and Undrajavaram
24
Chittoor and Kakinada.
25
Overwriting without attestation by competent authority, monthly closing and reconciliation was not
done by Drawing and Disbursing Officers etc.
26
Addanki, Anakapalli, Gudur, Kurnool, Paravada, Puttaparthy, Rajamahendravaram and Rajole
27
Anandapuram, Bhogapuram, Chandrampalem, Darsi, Devarapaly, Duppada, Gajapathinagaram,
Gargeyapuram, Inkollu, Kumili, Lakkavarapukota, Paravada, Parchur, Podili, Tanguturu, Terlam and
Thummapala
28
Anakapalli and Rajole
29
Akutotapally, Anandapuram, Bhogapuram, Chandrampalem, Devarapaly, Dowleswaram, Duppada,
Dwarapudi, Gajapathinagaram, Gargeyapuram, Kumili, Lakkavarapukota, Terlam and Thummapala
30
One GP in each Anantapuramu and East Godavari, five GPs in Prakasam, three GPs in
Visakhapatnam, six GPs in Vizianagaram and MPDOs of Palakonda and Rajole

Page 9
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

sustained by Government and the action to be initiated for recovery. State Government
had ordered (February 2004) the Secretaries of all the departments to review the cases
of misappropriation in their departments on a monthly basis. The Chief Secretary to
Government was to review these cases once in six months with all the Secretaries
concerned. Misappropriation cases noticed by Director, State Audit, which were not
disposed of as of March 2017 are detailed below:
Table 1.6
(` in lakh)
As of March 201731
Unit
No. of cases Amount
Zilla Praja Parishads 8 140.10
Mandal Praja Parishads 52 41.79
Gram Panchayats 586 518.70
Total 646 700.59
Source: Information furnished by Director, State Audit
Records of test-checked PRIs (MPPs and ZPP) showed that misappropriated amount of
`35.64 lakh pertaining to 12 PRIs (11 MPDOs and one ZPP) was yet to be recovered
as of October 2017. Urgent action needs to be taken by the Government in this regard.
1.14 Maintenance of Accounts by PRIs
PRIs maintain accounts on cash basis. GoI prescribed a Model Accounting System in
consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor General of India. State Government
issued orders (September 2010) for adopting this format using PRIASoft (Panchayat
Raj Institutions Accounting Software) developed by National Informatics Centre
(NIC). Out of total 13,59332 PRIs in the State, 7,931 PRIs were using PRIASoft for
maintaining accounts while rest of the PRIs (5,662) were maintaining the accounts
manually. Against 7,931 PRIs using PRIASoft, 3,461 PRIs, finalised their accounts for
the year 2016-17 (November 2017) and in rest of the 4,470 PRIs, finalisation of
accounts was in progress.
Records of 44 test-checked PRIs showed that seven PRIs33 were not maintaining the
accounts through PRIASoft. Further, discrepancies were noticed between annual
accounts maintained manually and those uploaded in PRIASoft in respect of 10 PRIs34.
1.15 Issues related to AC/DC Bills
As per Government Orders35 an amount drawn on Abstract Contingent (AC) bills
should be adjusted by submitting Detailed Contingent (DC) bill for the expenditure
incurred, to the Accountant General (Accounts & Entitlements) with supporting

31
No information has been provided in respect of misappropriation cases for the year 2016-17
32
13-ZPPs, 660-MPPs and 12,920-GPs
33
MPDOs of Akividu, Chintalapudi, Palkol, Rajamahendravaram, Samalkot, Undrajavaram and ZPP
Kakinada
34
GPs: Darsi, Devarapalli, Dowleswaram, Gargeyapuram, Inkollu, Paravada, Parchur, Tangutur
MPPs: Mandapeta and Kurnool
35
G.O. Ms.No.285 Finance (TFR-II) department dated 15 October 2005, Andhra Pradesh Treasury
Code, Rule 16, sub rule 18(d) and G.O. Ms.No.391 and 507 of April/May 2002 of Finance department

Page 10
 Chapter I - An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of
Panchayat Raj Institutions

vouchers within one month of drawal of such amount.

Submission of DC bills for an amount of `79.55 lakh was pending as of July 2017 which
were drawn through AC bills36 by PRIs during the period 2011-17.
1.16 Advances pending adjustment
As per Andhra Pradesh Financial Code, advances paid should be adjusted without any
delay. Drawing and Disbursing Officers (DDOs) concerned should watch their
adjustment. Records of 44 test-checked PRIs showed that advances of `18.45 lakh were
paid (2010-16) to staff in four PRIs37 for various purposes. These advances remained
unadjusted as of March 2017.

36
As per information furnished by the Office of the Principal Accountant General (Accounts &
Entitlements), Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad
37
MPP: Addanki (`4.62 lakh), Cheemakurthy (`0.67 lakh) and Ravulapalem (`8.03 lakh)
GP: Gajapathinagaram (`5.13 lakh)

Page 11
 Chapter – II
Compliance Audit Paragraphs

Pages 13-26
 Chapter II - Compliance Audit Paragraphs

Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department

2.1 Land Management in Panchayat Raj Institutions

2.1.1 Introduction
The eleventh schedule to 73rd amendment to the Constitution of India defines the tasks
in the functioning of Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs). In carrying out these functions,
PRIs require land. PRIs are responsible for proper acquisition, effective custody,
utilisation and protection of land.
2.1.2 Organisational set-up
Panchayat Raj Institution (PRI) is a three-tier system of self-governance viz., Zilla Praja
Parishad (ZPP) at District level, Mandal Praja Parishad (MPP) at Mandal level and
Gram Panchayat (GP) at Village level.
The PRIs function under the administrative control of Principal Secretary, Panchayat
Raj and Rural Development (PR&RD) at Government level. Commissioner, PR&RD
is the Head of the PR&RD department. ZPP, MPP and GP are headed by Chairperson,
President and Sarpanch respectively. The Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Mandal
Parishad Development Officer (MPDO) and Panchayat Secretary (PS) is the executive
authority of ZPP, MPP and GP respectively.
2.1.3 Audit framework
Audit of land management in Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs) was carried out with
the objective of assessing whether:
i) acquisition/alienation/transfer of land to PRIs was properly executed as per
the prescribed procedure;
ii) alienation/transfer of land /lease of land by PRIs were effectively carried out
and
iii) adequate controls were in existence for protection of PRI land.
The criteria to assess the effectiveness of land management by PRIs were sourced from
the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Andhra
Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, Andhra Pradesh Financial Code and orders
issued by State Government from time to time.
Seven1 out of 13 ZPPs in the State were selected for conducting compliance audit on
Land Management in PRIs. Under each ZPP, five Mandals2 were selected on random

1
50 per cent of ZPPs Anantapuramu, Chittoor, East Godavari, Guntur, SPSR Nellore, Srikakulam and
Visakhapatnam were selected by applying random sampling method
2
Out of total 660 Mandals existing in Andhra Pradesh

Page 13
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

sampling basis. From each district, 10 GPs3 were selected based on highest number of
layouts4 for detailed examination of records.
Compliance audit on Land Management in selected PRIs, covering the period 2014-17,
was conducted between February and July 2017. Audit methodology involved scrutiny
of relevant records/documents at the office of the Commissioner, PR&RD and the
selected ZPPs, MPPs and GPs. Necessary data/information about land of PRIs were
also obtained from Revenue Department wherever necessary.
Audit findings
2.1.4 Land Management
State Government had reviewed (October 2004) the system of asset management and
maintenance of registers and records in place with various Government Departments in
the State. Government noticed that the records of the assets (including land) were not
updated. As such, a need was felt for strengthening the asset management at various
levels. Accordingly, instructions were issued (October 2004) to develop and maintain
inventory of all assets.
2.1.4.1 Maintenance of Asset Register
State Government prescribed (October 2004) the format for maintaining the asset
register. The register should contain the name of the asset, survey number, extent/ area,
year of acquisition/transfer, present market value and present status of asset,
Government/department land and location /address. Audit noticed that the test checked
ZPPs held land measuring 8,653.04 acres (Appendix- 2.1). MPPs held land measuring
705.20 acres (Appendix- 2.2) as per statement of assets.
All the seven test-checked ZPPs and 35 test-checked MPPs did not maintain asset
registers. Only statement of assets was maintained by the PRIs without the necessary
details5 and the same was not reconciled with Revenue Authorities.
State Government issued regulations (July 2011) to protect the properties of the GPs.
The land belonging to GPs shall be classified into three categories6. Land inventory
shall be prepared based on Field Measurement Book/Field Survey Atlas and field
inspections. The land inventory shall be placed before Gram Sabha for validation and
the same shall be published in District Gazette. Seventy7 test-checked GPs held land
measuring 544.17 acres (Appendix-2.3). Out of this, 61 GPs8 neither maintained

3
Out of total 12,920 Gram Panchayats (GPs) existing in Andhra Pradesh
4
Layout means the laying out a parcel of land or land into building plots with laying of roads/streets
and footpaths, etc. and laying of the services such as water supply, drainage, street lighting, open
spaces, avenue plantation etc.
5
Details like location of the land, survey numbers, actual extent of land, cost of the land, etc.
6
Category A- Own and acquired, Category B- Gifts, donations, transfer of land to GP, Category C-
Vested (minor irrigation tanks, water bodies, grazing lands etc.) with GP
7
One GP of Chittoor, four GPs of East Godavari, one GP of Guntur, four GPs of SPSR Nellore and
six GPs of Visakhapatnam did not have the information on assets held
8
Anantapuramu: 10, Chittoor: 10, East Godavari: 10, Guntur: 3, SPSR Nellore: 10, Srikakulam: 9,
Visakhapatnam: 9

Page 14
 Chapter II - Compliance Audit Paragraphs

asset register nor obtained validation by Gram Sabha. GPs did not categorize the
land.
Revenue records such as Adangal9/Re-Settlement Register10/Field Measurement Book
would substantiate genuineness of assets, their safety and prevention of any misuse.
PRIs did not possess copies of these essential records and hence cannot vouchsafe their
claim of ownership of land. Further, the Department of PR&RD also did not maintain
database of assets held by PRIs. Some instances of non-availability of valuable
properties in the statement of assets are given below:
1. Under the instructions (July 2001) of District Collector, Revenue Authorities
transferred (August 2001) land measuring 3.44 acres to ZPP, Visakhapatnam. The
land was transferred for construction of high school and playground in Juttada
village. The details of asset transferred were not recorded in the statement of assets.
2. Tehsildar, Guntur informed (January 1982) ZPP, Guntur that the properties located
in 13 survey numbers11 in Guntur belonged to ZPP. However, these properties did
not find place in the statement of assets maintained by ZPP as of May 2017 despite
lapse of 35 years. Similarly, area covering ZPP office quarters, petrol pump in the
premises of ZPP Guntur also did not find place in the statement of assets.
Absence of land inventory / asset register increases risk of encroachments and loss of
ownership of assets. Hence, proper controls should be put in place to ensure
maintenance of asset registers with up to date entries.
State Government replied (January 2018) that instructions were issued to all the CEOs
and DPOs in the State to maintain asset register as per rules. State Government also
replied that CEO, ZPP, Guntur was directed to take necessary action in the matter.
However, no specific reply was furnished by the State Government in respect of
Visakhapatnam.
2.1.4.2 Non-mutation of property
The PRIs were in possession of land measuring 1,310.05 acres12 through donations13.
However, the land14 was not mutated in favour of PRIs. In the absence of mutation,
PRIs cannot establish their ownership in case land is encroached or claimed by the heirs
of the donors. Some instances of non-mutation of property are given below:
1. Potluru villagers had donated land (6.44 acres)15 to the ZPP Guntur for running ZP
High School. Land donated (5.89 acres) in 1997 was recorded in Adangal with
incorrect survey numbers. Land donated (0.55 acres) in 2008 was not recorded in
Adangal. Villagers complained (March 2017) about encroachment of a portion of
land.

9
This register is maintained by Revenue Department. The Register contains the details of
possessors/pattadars of land, name of the occupant, survey numbers, extent and nature of occupancy.
10
Register shows particulars of survey numbers/sub-division number classification etc.
11
Survey numbers 247, 281, 547, 681, 710/A, 710/B, 732, 851, 894, 949, 939, 953 and 1211
12
Anantapuramu: 240.56 acres, Chittoor: 808.46 acres, East Godavari: 14.60 acres, Guntur: 75.24 acres,
SPSR Nellore: 96.38 acres, Srikakulam: 69.60 acres and Visakhapatnam: 5.21acres.
13
from individuals/villagers for construction and development of schools, and other public purposes
recorded in the statement of assets
14
except in Kaza and Edlapadu GPs of Guntur District
15
5.89 acres registered in the year 1997 and 0.55 acres unregistered (as of 2008) in Potlur Village of
Savalyapuram Mandal

Page 15
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

ZPP Guntur replied (May 2017) that MPDO was asked to submit detailed report on
encroachment. Tehsildar concerned was requested to survey the land and fix the
borders to evict the encroachers.
2. Ameenpalem Villagers (Nadendla Mandal) donated (1982) 24.65 acres of land to
ZPP Guntur for development of ZP High School. The donated land was neither
mutated in the name of ZPP nor recorded in the statement of assets.
3. ZPP, Anantapuramu received (March 2000) donation of two acres16 of land for
development of playground of ZPP High School. Despite lapse of 17 years
(July 2017), the donated land was neither recorded in the asset register nor
mutated/taken possession by the ZPP.
ZPP replied (May 2017) that Tehsildar was asked (May 2017) to conduct survey
and fix the boundaries.
4. Two individuals donated (June 1990) five acres17 of land through a gift deed18 in
favour of ZPP, Anantapuramu for playground and garden for the high school. As
the land was not mutated in favour of ZPP, Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO),
Anantapuramu issued (2011) Pattadar Pass Books (PPB)19 for land of 3.35 acres out
of 5 acres in favour of one of the donors. The CEO, ZPP, Anantapuramu appealed
(January 2011) to RDO to cancel the PPB issued in favour of the donor. Action
taken by RDO was not on record.
Thus, ZPPs failed to survey the donated land and enter the details thereof in the
statement of asset and take proper action for mutation/possession to establish
ownership.
State Government replied (January 2018) that the Chief Executive Officers of ZPPs
concerned were directed to take necessary action in the matter.
2.1.4.3 Alienation/Transfer of land
State Government issued orders (June 2001) that PRI land shall be alienated only in
favour of Government departments/Government organisations20. Prior approval of
Government is necessary, where cost of ZPP land exceeds rupees one lakh in respect
of land alienated to Government organisations and rupees two lakh in respect of
Government department.
Audit noticed seven cases of alienation of land measuring 20.34 acres valuing
`5.90 crore without approval of Government in three test-checked districts
(Appendix- 2.4). The cost of the alienated land was not recovered from the
departments/organisations as of March 2017.

16
Survey No. 799-C in Tummala Panchayat
17
Survey No. 197 in Kandukur village
18
Gift deed is a legal document describing the voluntary transfer of a property from one person to
another without any consideration as money or value in exchange
19
Every person who holds land directly under the Government under a patta whose name is registered
in land revenue.
20
where Government has a share of more than 50 per cent

Page 16
 Chapter II - Compliance Audit Paragraphs

State Government replied (January 2018) that instructions were issued to all the Chief
Executive Officers of ZPPs and DPOs in the State to strictly follow the rules in case of
alienation/transfer of lands.
2.1.4.4 Layouts and open spaces
State Government formulated Gram Panchayat Land Development (Layout and
building) Rules 2002 to regulate or restrict the use of sites and buildings. The rules are
applicable to all Gram Panchayat (GP) areas. An owner/group of owners who intend
to layout their land into building plots can apply to a Gram Panchayat (GP) for layout
permission by duly paying the prescribed fees. The proposal is forwarded to the District
Town and Country Planning21 (DTCP) for technical approval. A minimum open
space22 of 10 per cent of the total site area being developed shall be set apart in the
proposed layout for playground/park /education institution or any other public purpose.
Such open space should be free from all encumbrances and shall be transferred in the
name of GP concerned free of cost. The following observations are made:

Sl. No Title of the paragraph Audit findings

i. Shortfall in transfer of In 70 test-checked GPs, 1,194 layouts
open space in authorized (Appendix- 2.5) were developed in the land
layouts measuring 6,899.62 acres during the period 1980-
2016. Out of this, layout developers were to transfer
10 per cent open space (689.96 acres)23 to the
concerned Gram Panchayats. Audit noticed that open
space measuring 482.33 acres only was transferred to
the concerned GPs leaving a shortfall of
207.63 acres24 in respect of 50 GPs. The concerned
GPs did not initiate action to claim the due extent of
land from the layout developers as of July 2017.
Audit assessed the value of such space as
`60.30 crore25. Thus, proper controls should be put in
place to ensure receipt of legitimate share of land
from layouts by GPs.
State Government replied (January 2018) that
instructions were issued to all the DPOs in the State
to follow the rules for approval of layouts and
building permissions.
ii. Unauthorised layouts Rule 12 (1) & (2) of Layout Rules 200226 envisages
that the unauthorized layouts shall be regularized
duly levying pro-rata charges for shortfall of open
spaces. Pro-rata betterment charges shall also be
levied in addition to development and improvement

21
Urban Development Authority in case of GPs falling under their jurisdiction
22
Means an area forming integral part of the plot, left open to sky
23
Anantapuramu: 40.84 acres, Chittoor: 130.42 acres, East Godavari: 315.87 acres, Guntur: 63.88 acres,
SPSR Nellore: 36.90 acres, Srikakulam: 9.03 acres and Visakhapatnam: 93.02 acres
24
Anantapuramu: 18.30 acres , Chittoor: 12.24 acres, East Godavari: 84.79 acres, Guntur: 27.10 acres,
SPSR Nellore: 10.77 acres, Srikakulam: 7.19 acres and Visakhapatnam: 47.24 acres
25
1 Acre = 4,840.01 Sq. yards. Value of 207.63 acres =`60.30 crore (207.63 x 4,840.01 x minimum
rate of `600 per Sq. yards.)
26
Read with G.O Ms.No.902 dated 31.12.2007 issued by Municipal Administration (applicable to PRIs)

Page 17
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

of road pattern and drainage, etc. These charges were

to be borne by the owners of the plots/colony.
In 70 test-checked GPs, 1,241 layouts
(Appendix- 2.5) were developed on land measuring
4,960.39 acres un-authorisedly (without the
administrative sanction of GP and technical approval
of DTCP/UDA). GPs issued notices to unauthorized
occupants. However, the GPs did not initiate further
action to get the layouts regularized by collecting the
prescribed charges. Open space of 483.54 acre27 was
foregone as the GPs did not prevent unauthorized
layouts. Audit assessed the value of foregone open
space as `140.42 crore28.
The Vigilance & Enforcement (V&E) Department of
State had conducted inspections (2014-16) and
identified 6,820.22 acres of unauthorized layouts in
the State. Loss of revenue in this regard was assessed
as `305.58 crore by the department towards open
space, inspection charges, layout fee, etc. However,
District Panchayat Officers (DPOs) did not initiate
action either to regularize layouts or to recover the
loss as of date (July 2017).
State Government replied (January 2018) that the
proposal for regularization of unauthorized layouts
duly levying pro-rata charges was under examination
for fixation of guidelines in the matter.

2.1.5 Leasing of land and shops

2.1.5.1 Leasing of Land
ZPP or MPP may lease out land for a period of three years and no lease shall be valid
if it exceeds three years. As per Rule 929, the ZPP shall publish a notice in District
Gazette if the lease exceeds `200 per annum of the property to be leased along with
name of the lessee and rent fixed under the lease. The lease rent shall be 10 per cent of
the prevailing market value of the land as fixed by the competent authority.
In two30 out of seven test-checked ZPPs, land was leased to private parties. Following
observations are made based on review of leases.
i. The Roads and Buildings (R&B) Department mooted (October 2013) proposals
for acquisition of ZPP land31 measuring 1.59 acres as part of proposed four-lane
Highway32. The proposal included construction of toll plaza and administrative

27
Anantapuramu- 256.00 acres, Chittoor- 65.45 acres, East Godavari- 12.60 acres, Guntur- 38.51 acres,
SPSR Nellore- 14.38 acres, Srikakulam- 57.74 acres and Visakhapatnam- 38.86 acres
28
One acre = 4,840.01 Sq. yards. Value of 483.54 acres = `140.42 crore (483.54 x 4,840.01 x minimum
rate of `600 per Sq. yard.)
29
Rules relating to Acquisition and Transfer of Immovable property by Mandal Praja Parishads and
Zilla Praja Parishads, issued under G.O Ms. No.492 dated 10.04.1962
30
East Godavari and Guntur
31
Survey number 251 in Thummalapalli Village in Piduguralla Mandal, Guntur district
32
Narketpalli-Addanki-Medarametla

Page 18
 Chapter II - Compliance Audit Paragraphs

buildings. R&B took over the possession of the land and allowed private agency33
to construct the toll plaza pending approval of the Government. R&B requested
(June 2015) ZPP, Guntur to allot the land to agency on lease basis since the agency
had already commenced his operations. ZPP, Guntur34 worked out the rental
value for the land as `35.71 lakh per annum to be increased by 15 per cent each
year. However, ZPP did not make claim for an amount of `1.50 crore (for the
period November 2013 to March 2017). Thus, ZPP Guntur allowed utilization of
its land by the concessionaire without claiming the rental charges.
The ZPP replied (April 2017) that the lease amount would be collected.
ii. District Board of Guntur35 leased out (April 1949) land36 in Mangalagiri town for
a period of 99 years to the High School Committee37 at rupee one per year. As
per the terms and conditions of lease agreement, the lessee should not make any
alteration or additions to the buildings without the previous consent of the lessor.
The lessee shall also not assign/underlet/part with the possession of the premises
or any part thereof without obtaining the written consent of the lessor or its
authorized officer. As the ownership of the land lies with ZPP, the lessee had no
right to construct shops and also to levy and collect the rents from shops.
However, in violation of the agreement, the lessee constructed (1964) additional
rooms in the school building. The lessee also constructed (1992) 29 shops by
dismantling the compound wall in the leased land without the consent and
approval of ZPP. The ZPP, Guntur did not initiate penal action for breach of
agreement. ZPP, instead, entered into (March 2000) a fresh lease agreement with
the same lessee at `12,000 per annum for 29 shops till completion of lease period
(December 2047). Accounts Officer, ZPP Guntur assessed (March 2017) the
lease charges as `12 lakh per annum from 29 shops. This would result in loss of
revenue of `3.56 crore38 for the next 30 years of lease. Action39 was not taken in
respect of unauthorized buildings. This indicated that the ZPP had shown undue
favour to the lessee.
iii. Government gave permission (September 2015) to the Collector, East Godavari
for allotment of ZPP land measuring 2,000 Sq. yards40 for ‘Construction of NTR
Trust Bhavan’ on lease basis. The lease was allowed (November 2016) for a
period of 99 years with a lease amount of `25,000 per annum. The Sub- Registrar
assessed the value of land as `three crore. As such the lease rent should have been
fixed at `30 lakh per annum at 10 per cent of prevailing market value of the land.

33
Concessionaire
34
Engineering wing of PRI Division
35
Present Zilla Praja Parishad
36
Survey number 251 and 258 in Mangalagiri
37
Chinthakrindi Kanakayya High School Committee
38
`11.88 lakh (`12 lakh - `0.12 lakh) per year for 30 years
39
The lessee violated agreement conditions by constructing additional buildings (shops) and leased out
the shops to private parties on monthly rent. Hence, ZPP should either collect the rent from the lessee
on par with present market rate or dispossess the lessee by cancelling the agreement.
40
Survey No. 60/1 of Kakinada urban

Page 19
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Thus, non-compliance of Government orders resulted in loss of revenue of

`29.75 lakh per annum.
Thus, the PRIs failed to recover due rental charges, allowed unauthorized constructions,
failed to assess and levy proper lease charges and to evict the unauthorized occupation.
State Government accepted and stated (January 2018) that Chief Executive Officers of
ZPPs concerned were directed to take necessary action for corrective measures.
2.1.5.2 Leasing of shops
As per Government Orders41, PRIs may lease shops for a period of five years. PRI can
renew the lease for another term not exceeding five years at a time without conducting
public auction, if the present lessee agrees to renew the lease at an amount which shall
not be less than 33.33 per cent over the existing annual lease amount. Lease agreement
shall be entered into with the lessee and lease amount shall be paid on or before the first
day of each month in advance42. The lease deed is liable to be terminated in case of
default of payment.
Review of the records revealed the following:
1. ZPP Visakhapatnam constructed and allotted (1973) 42 shops on rental basis to
Burma Repatriates for doing business at Yellamanchili. Gram Panchayat,
Yellamanchili reported (September 2010) that all the shops (except two) were being
run by benamis. MPDO also confirmed (November 2015) the same and stated that
two unauthorized shops were also constructed in the vacant space available at the
site. However, no action was taken against the benamis.
During the period 2014-17, ZPP was levying rent at `100 per month per shop. Rent
was proposed (May 2010) to be revised by enhancing the rent amount to
`231 per month per shop. However, this was not implemented due to which ZPP
suffered loss of `3.9643 lakh for the period 2011-17. Further, arrears amounting to
`5.36 lakh were also not collected as of March 2017.
The ZPP stated (March 2017) that rent could not be collected as the shops were
occupied by benamis and that the matter of eviction was referred to the District
Collector.
2. ZPP, Guntur leased 16 shops at Gurazala, the lease period of which expired in
November 2008. ZPP neither enhanced the lease charges by 33.33 per cent over
the existing lease rent nor resorted to fresh auction. ZPP Guntur issued (June 2014)
notice for dispossession of the shops as lessees did not pay the arrears of rents. On
the other hand, Writ Petitions44 was filed suo motu by some lessees for restraining
ZPP from dispossessing the shops. The Honorable High Court ordered
(August 2015) that petitioners shall be permitted to continue to remain in

41
G.O Ms. No.492, Planning and local administration dated 10.04.1962
42
Rule 6(1)(iv) and 6 (2) of G.O Ms. No.215 dated 25.06.2001
43
`231-`100= `131 x 72 months x 42 shops
44
WP No. 19320 of 2015

Page 20
 Chapter II - Compliance Audit Paragraphs

occupation of shops on payment of enhanced rent at 35 per cent on the existing rent
payable. Further, on payment of all the enhanced rental amounts due, the lease
holders could participate in the public auction as and when such auction was
conducted. However, ZPP did not collect the revised rent as ordered by the
Honorable High Court. An amount of `9.92 lakh for the period 2008-15 was yet to
be realized. ZPP stated (May 2017) that rent at enhanced rates for the earlier period
would be collected.
3. In four out of seven test-checked ZPPs, lease rent of `36.02 lakh45 was outstanding
in respect of 127 shops to the end of March 2017 as per Demand Collection and
Balance Register. In four Gram Panchayats an amount of `17.0146 lakh was
outstanding in respect of 64 shops as of March 2017. Rent was not collected in
advance as per Government Orders (June 2001).
Thus, there was loss of revenue to PRIs on account of non-collection/short
collection/non-enhancement of lease rentals.
State Government accepted and stated (January 2018) that Chief Executive Officers of
ZPPs concerned were directed to take necessary action for corrective measures.
2.1.6 Monitoring and Protection of land
2.1.6.1 Encroachments
Audit noticed in four out of seven test-checked districts that an extent of land measuring
431.98 acres47, valuing `125.45 crore48 was under encroachment. Scrutiny of records
relating to encroachments revealed the following:
i. In Kaza GP of Guntur District, land measuring 50 acres49 of Tank area was
encroached and 600 houses were constructed thereon. Panchayat Secretary brought
(May 2012) the matter to the notice of Revenue Authorities. The Revenue
authorities did not take action to survey encroachments even though the tank area
was classified as Government land belonging to GP. The land remained encroached
as of July 2017.
ii. Tehsildar, Visakhapatnam (Rural) had conducted survey and communicated
(October 2008) to ZPP Visakhapatnam about encroachment of ZPP land
(1.05 acres). ZPP had not taken immediate action on receipt of information from
Revenue authorities to conduct survey/enquiry to evict the encroachers. Further,
encroachers occupied ZPP, Visakhapatnam land (11 acres) under different survey

45
East Godavari: `0.38 lakh (seven shops), Guntur: `31.26 lakh (111 shops), Srikakulam: `2.06 lakh
(one shop) and Visakhapatnam: `2.32 lakh (eight shops)
46
Chebrole: `1.03 lakh (18 shops), Payakaraopeta: `1.73 lakh (14 shops), Perecherla: `13.74 lakh
(15 shops) and Uravakonda: `0.51 lakh (17 shops)
47
East Godavari: 33.32 acres, Guntur: 327.74 acres, SPSR Nellore: 58.26 acres, Visakhapatnam:
12.66 acres
48
At minimum value of `600 per Sq. yard.
49
Survey No. 310/A and 344

Page 21
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

numbers50 situated on both the sides of Sharada River in Kotturu village51 in 2006.
Un-authorized buildings were also constructed on this land. Action taken to evict
the encroachers was not on record.
iii. Encroachers occupied land (4.93 acres) belonging to ZP High Schools and MPP
Schools in Chittoor district, during the period between 1998 and 2015. The
encroachers had constructed houses/shops and utilized the encroached land for
various purposes. ZPP requested (May 1998 to March 2015) the Tehsildar of the
respective Mandals to survey the land, fix boundaries and take action to evict the
encroachers. However, the land remained encroached as of July 2017.
iv. Ten encroachers occupied the Puntha/road to the extent of 4.11 acres52 belonging
to Payakaraopeta Gram Panchayat (Visakhapatnam District). Sub-Collector
directed (November 2013) the Tehsildar, Payakaraopeta to evict the encroachers
and safeguard the interests of the GP. GP did not take any necessary action. In
February 2017, the Panchayat Secretary requested the Tehsildar to conduct a survey
of encroachment. However, the Tehsildar had not taken any action as of July 2017.
Similarly, 47 encroachers constructed structures (0.50 acres) on the banks of
Thandava River under Payakaraopeta GP. Panchayat Secretary submitted names
of occupants (October 2016) to Tehsildar. No action was taken for eviction of the
encroachers.
v. Encroachers occupied land measuring 0.81 acres53 in ZPP Guntur. MPDO
Mangalagiri reported (March 2012) cases of encroachment to ZPP, Guntur.
Accounts Officer of the ZPP conducted (July 2012) an enquiry on the matter and
submitted report in May 2013. The report highlighted cases of individuals
occupying without documents, individuals paying Property Tax and individuals
possessing B-form54 documents. ZPP did not initiate action to bring cases of
encroachment to the notice of Government and evict the encroachers.
vi. Encroachers occupied the open space (0.42 acres) in Chapuram GP of Srikakulam
District allotted out of authorized layouts. GP did not take action to evict the
encroachers.
Thus, there was no effective mechanism available in the PRIs to protect the land and
avoid encroachments. Encroachments reported were not acted upon for eviction, giving
scope for continued encroachments.
State Government accepted and stated (January 2018) that all the Chief Executive
Officers of ZPPs and DPOs in the State were directed to take immediate necessary
action for eviction of encroachments in Government lands as per the Rules55.

50
590/18 (3.93 acres), 583/1 (0.83 acres), 593/3 (1.50 acres), 597/1 (1.05 acres), 582/2 (0.71 acres), 584
(1.33 acres), 588/4 (1.65 acres)
51
erstwhile Sabbavaram Panchayat Samithi
52
Survey No. 108
53
Survey No.117 in Navluru village of Mangalagiri mandal
54
Patta/permission given by the Revenue Department to landless poor people for construction of house
55
G.O. Ms. No.188, dated 21.07.2011

Page 22
 Chapter II - Compliance Audit Paragraphs

2.1.6.2 Avoidable litigation due to lack of monitoring

1. Land (0.27 acres)56 belonging to ZP High School in Gopalapatnam village of ZPP
Visakhapatnam was reported (March 2002) as encroached. The encroacher had
constructed (2007) a shopping complex on the encroached land. ZPP took up the
issue of eviction of the encroachment belatedly (October 2006) with the revenue
department and Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation (GVMC). ZPP had
also filed a case in the Honorable District Court in January 2010 for eviction. In
the meantime, the encroacher filed (November 2011) a case against GVMC in the
Honorable High Court, Hyderabad. The Honorable High Court ordered
(March 2012) to seal the shopping complex as the same was unauthorized and did
not have occupancy certificate. Further, District Court also ordered
(September 2015) the encroacher to vacate the land. The Tehsildar seized the
Shopping Mall (March 2012) and kept the building in possession of GVMC.
However, ZPP reported (March 2017) that the encroacher continued to do the
business in the shopping complex despite seizer of the building by Tehsildar.
Further, the encroacher had filed for stay orders on the judgment pronounced by the
District Court. Thus, ZPP failed to take timely action to prevent the encroacher
from construction of shopping complex in the valuable land of ZPP. This showed
lack of monitoring of land by ZPP which also resulted in continuation of business
by the encroacher in violation of orders of Honorable High Court.
2. MRO Narasaraopet assigned (August 1985) ZPP land, to an extent of five acres57,
to an ex-serviceman without the consent of the ZPP Guntur. As the land belonged
to ZPP, Tehsildar denied mutation in favour of heirs of ex-serviceman. On denial
of mutation the heirs of the ex-serviceman filed (October 2016) a petition in the
Honorable High Court, Hyderabad for orders of mutation of land in their favour.
The Honorable High court ordered (January 2017) the Tehsildar, Karempudi to
consider the application of the petitioners for mutation in their names in the revenue
records in accordance with law. The MRO Karempudi brought (February 2017)
the matter to the notice of the ZPP. ZPP requested the MRO not to go ahead with
mutation since the matter would be brought to the notice of the ZPP Council and
also proposed to approach the Honorable High Court. However, no action was
taken in this regard (April 2017). Lack of coordination between the Revenue
Department and ZPP resulted in litigation.
This showed lack of monitoring of lands by ZPPs, which resulted in court cases on
ownership of valuable land.
State Government accepted and stated (January 2018) that all the Chief Executive
Officers of ZPPs in the State were directed to take necessary action in the matter.

56
Survey No. 10/3B at Gopalapatnam village
57
Survey No. 337-3CB of Oppicherla village of Karempudi Mandal

Page 23
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

2.1.6.3 Non-availability of dedicated staff for land management

The test-checked PRIs were not having dedicated and trained staff proficient in land
issues to deal with accountal of all land inventories, monitoring of the land held and to
prevent encroachments. The staff who were maintaining land records were not trained
on matters relating to land issues. Improper maintenance of land records, ineffective
monitoring and failure to evict encroachers could be attributed to untrained staff.
2.1.6.4 Formation of Asset Protection Committees
i. Non-formation of separate cell at district level
A separate cell at district level58 in the Office of the District Panchayat Officer (DPO)
was to be constituted to monitor and protect the Gram Panchayat properties from time
to time. Out of seven test-checked districts, separate cells were not formed in four
districts59 to monitor and protect the GP properties. As such, there were instances of
encroachment of land and development of unauthorized layouts.
ii. Non-formation of High Power Committees at District level
At District level, High Power Committee60 shall be constituted with DPO as Member
Convener to review the progress of identification and removal of encroachments. The
Committee shall meet every three months and review the progress. However, in three
test-checked districts61, no such committees were formed to review the progress of
identification and removal of encroachments.
iii. Non-formation of Vigilance and Enforcement wing
At Commissionerate level, a Vigilance and Enforcement wing62 shall be constituted
with Additional Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner to protect the GP properties and
to monitor the activities of district level cells. However, no records were maintained in
support of formation of a separate wing and its functioning at Commissionerate level.
2.1.6.5 Periodical reporting not done
The GoAP issued orders63 that the Heads of Departments (HoDs) shall compile all
assets of all Subordinate offices and agencies, including State level offices. After
compilation of all assets, HoDs shall report (in hard and soft formats) the asset
inventory of lands, buildings, etc., information by 31st December every year for all the
existing assets of Government to their administrative departments of Secretariat. The
Administrative Departments of Secretariat, in turn, shall furnish the asset information to
the Finance Department by 15th January every year, for all the asset inventory
information of previous calendar year. However, no such procedure was followed by

58
Para 5 of G.O Ms. No.188 dated 21.07.2011
59
Anantapuramu, Chittoor, Srikakulam and Visakhapatnam
60
Para 7 of G.O Ms. No.188 dated 21.07.2011
61
Chittoor, Srikakulam and Visakhapatnam
62
Para 8 of G.O Ms. No.188 dated 21.07.2011
63
G.O Ms.No.667 dated 11.10.2004 guidelines on Asset Management and Maintenance of Registers
and Records issued by Finance Department

Page 24
 Chapter II - Compliance Audit Paragraphs

the test-checked PRIs and Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department as land
inventory was not prepared by PRIs.
2.1.7 Conclusion
The PRIs did not maintain Asset Register despite specific orders of the Government.
Donated land was not surveyed/taken to inventory and also not mutated to establish
ownership. The PRI land was alienated without the approval of the Government and
recovery of cost of the land. Unauthorised layouts were allowed and open space due
from authorised layouts was not transferred to PRIs causing loss of property. Rules on
leasing of land and shops were not adhered to resulting in loss of revenue and
unauthorised constructions. Monitoring mechanism was not found to be effective.
2.2 Avoidable additional charges of `65.77 lakh

Failure of the Zilla Parishads to ensure payment of electricity bills within the
due dates resulted in avoidable payment of additional charges of `65.77 lakh

State Government entrusted (December 2012) the responsibility of Operations and

Maintenance (O&M) of all Rural Water Supply (RWS) Schemes to the local bodies.
The O&M activities include making payments of power supply charges of the schemes
for which funds are allocated from Finance Commission grants. Zilla Parishads are
authorised to incur expenditure from any available grant, in case of delay in release of
funds by Government subject to reimbursement. As per Electricity Supply Code of
Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (APERC) in case the consumers
do not pay the bills by due date, additional charges for delayed payment of bills shall
apply as per tariff orders.
Scrutiny of the records of five Zilla Parishads for the period 2011-17 showed that
payment of electricity charges was not being made in time. An amount of `65.77 lakh
(Appendix- 2.6) was paid, during the period, as additional charges for delayed payment
of electricity bills for O&M activities of Water Supply schemes. Zilla Parishads
attributed delayed payment to Finance Commission grants not being received in time
and lack of sufficient funds. Reply is not acceptable as Zilla Parishads are authorised
to utilize any available funds in cases of delays.
Thus, failure of the Zilla Parishads to ensure payment of electricity bills within the due
dates resulted in avoidable payment of additional charges of `65.77 lakh.
State Government accepted (January 2018) the audit observation and replied that power
supply companies were requested for taking a generous view for waiver of penalties in
delayed payment of electricity bills.

Page 25
 Part – B
Urban Local Bodies
 Chapter – III
An overview of the functioning and financial
reporting issues of Urban Local Bodies

Pages 27-35
 Chapter – III –An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of
Urban Local Bodies

Chapter III
Section-A
An Overview of the functioning of the Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) in the State

3.1 Introduction
Government of India (GoI) enacted (1992) the 74th amendment1 to the Constitution to
empower Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) as local self-governing institutions in the country
to perform effectively. Accordingly, State Government enacted Andhra Pradesh
Municipal Corporations Act, 1994 to set up Municipal Corporations in the State.
Provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (HMC) Act, 1955 including the
provisions relating to levy and collection of taxes or fees were extended to all other
Municipal Corporations in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Municipalities are governed
by the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965. The profile of ULBs in the State is
given in Table 3.1:
Table 3.1

Indicator Unit State statistics

Urban population Crore 1.46

Male Lakh 72.92

Female Lakh 73.18

Urban sex ratio Females per 1000 Males 1,004

Urban literacy rate Percentage 79.17

Municipal Corporations Number 14

Municipalities Number 71

Nagar Panchayats Number 25

Source: Information furnished by Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration
(CDMA) and Andhra Pradesh at a Glance (2016-17) published by Directorate of
Economics and Statistics, Government of Andhra Pradesh

1
For implementation of various socio-economic development schemes including those enumerated in
the Twelfth Schedule to the Constitution

Page 27
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

3.2 Organisational setup of ULBs

Organisational arrangements for the ULBs are as follows:
Chart 3.1

Principal Secretary,
Municipal Administration and Urban Development
Department

Commissioner and Director of Municipal

Administration

Municipal Municipalities Nagar

Corporations Panchayats

The ULBs are under the administrative control of the Commissioner and Director of
Municipal Administration (CDMA). Day-to-day administration of all the ULBs rests
with the Commissioner concerned.
3.3 Functioning of ULBs
The 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992 identified 18 functions for ULBs as
incorporated in the Twelfth Schedule to the Constitution. All the functions mentioned
in this Schedule were devolved to ULBs in the State except ‘Fire Services’.
3.4 Formation of various committees
The structure of the elected bodies of the ULBs is given below:
Chart 3.2

Municipal Corporations Municipalities/

Nagar Panchayats

Deputy Deputy
Mayor Corporators Chairperson Councilors
Mayor Chairperson

Page 28
 Chapter – III –An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of
Urban Local Bodies

The Municipalities and Corporations transact their business as per the provisions of the
Acts concerned. In respect of Corporations, the Standing Committees, comprising the
Chairpersons of all the Ward Committees under them, meet at intervals prescribed by
the Act. Similarly, in respect of Municipalities, the Municipal Ward Committees meet
at prescribed intervals to transact business, make regulations and scrutinise municipal
accounts. The main functions of the Ward Committees (Municipalities and
Corporations) include provision and maintenance of sanitation, water supply and
drainage, street lighting, roads, market places, playgrounds, school buildings, review of
revenue collections, preparation of annual budget, etc. Commissioner and Director of
Municipal Administration (CDMA) stated (September 2017) that out of 2,984 wards,
491 ward committees were constituted as of September 2017.
3.5 Sources of funds
Resource base of ULBs consists of their own revenue in the shape of tax2 and non-tax3
revenues, devolution at the instance of State and Central Finance Commissions, Central
and State Government grants for maintenance and development purposes and other
receipts4.
Summary of receipts of ULBs for the years 2012-17 is given in Table below. Receipts
for the period 2012-14 pertain to the composite State of Andhra Pradesh whereas the
receipts for the period 2014-17 pertain to the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh.
Table 3.2
(` in crore)
Sl. Receipts 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
No.
1 Own Revenue 2,898.52 3,183.43 840.86 946.04 2,250.58
2 Assigned Revenue5 819.28 695.66 181.81 156.84 372.23
3 State Government Grants 921.00 1,358.606 NA** 118.62 1,647.22
4 GoI Grants
Scheme funds 378.36 - NA** 178.29 312.20
13th and 14th Finance - - 818.28 318.31 483.14
Commission
5 Other Receipts* - 275.60 79.66 47.36 322.88
Total 5,017.16 5,513.29 1,920.61 1,765.46 5,388.25
Source: Data furnished by Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration
* Other receipts include loans, accrued interest, penalties received, forfeited
security deposits etc.
** Data not made available

2
Property Tax, Advertisement fee etc.
3
Water tax, rents from markets, shops and other properties, auction proceeds etc.,
4
Donations, interest on deposits etc.
5
Seigniorage fee and surcharge on stamp duty collected by Departments of Mines and Geology and
Stamps and Registration are apportioned to the Local Bodies in the form of assigned revenue
6
This includes grants received from GoI

Page 29
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

3.5.1 Financial Assistance to ULBs

Financial assistance was provided by State Government to ULBs by way of grants and
loans. Details of the financial assistance provided by the Government to ULBs are
given below:
Table 3.3
(` in crore)
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Budget 177.45 483.45 77.07 219.87 223.87

Actual Release 90.57 441.37 25.65 219.87 223.87

Source: Information furnished by CDMA

3.5.2 Application of funds

Details of expenditure incurred by ULBs for the period 2012-14 pertaining to the
composite State of Andhra Pradesh and for the period 2014-17 pertaining to the State
of Andhra Pradesh are given below:
Table 3.4
(` in crore)
Sl. Type of expenditure 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
No.

1 Revenue expenditure 3,153.33 3,418.10 836.82 884.91 2,454.99

2 Capital expenditure 1,166.59 1,573.30 410.23 451.29 1,768.83

Total 4,319.92 4,991.40 1,247.05 1,336.20 4,223.82

Source: Data furnished by Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration
As seen from the source of funds and expenditure particulars of ULBs during the year
2016-17, it was observed that there were savings of `1,164.437 crore.
3.6 Recommendations of the State Finance Commission (SFC)
As per Article 243Y of the Constitution, the State Government has to constitute SFC
once in five years to recommend devolution of funds from the State Government to
Local bodies. The Third SFC was constituted in January 2003 and submitted its report
in 2008. State Government had issued orders8 for implementation of the
recommendations of SFC only in December 2013. State Government did not constitute
SFC after 2013. The committee of Ministers and Secretaries felt that recommendations
of Third Finance Commission could be applied for the period 2010-15 also. The State

7
`5,388.25 crore-`4,223.82 crore= `1,164.43 crore
8
G.O. Ms. No. 512, MA&UD (Budget-2) department, dated 31.12.2013

Page 30
 Chapter – III –An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of
Urban Local Bodies

Government had released an amount of `133.92 crore (under State Finance

Commission) during 2016-17 and the entire amount was expended.
3.7 Recommendations of the Central Finance Commission (CFC)
The Fourteenth Finance Commission (FFC) recommended assured transfer of funds to
the local bodies for planning and delivering basic services9 under their charge. Grants
were released under two components, i.e., Basic grant and Performance grant. The
division of grants between Basic Grant and Performance Grant is in the ratio of 80:20.
During the year 2016-17, GoI released `483.14 crore. However, no amount was
expended as of November 2017.
3.8 Audit Mandate
3.8.1 Primary Auditor
Director, State Audit (DSA), functioning under the administrative control of Finance
Department, is the statutory auditor for ULBs under Andhra Pradesh State Audit
Act, 1989. As per Section 11(2) of the Act, DSA is required to prepare a consolidated
Audit and Review Report for presentation to the State Legislature. DSA has four
Regional Offices and 13 District offices in the State. As per Section 10 of the Act, DSA
is empowered to initiate surcharge proceedings against the persons responsible for
causing loss to the funds of local authorities. The executive authority concerned shall
recover such amounts under Revenue Recovery (RR) Act.
As per the information furnished (October 2017) by DSA, audit of annual accounts of
90 ULBs pertaining to earlier years was in arrears. DSA attributed delay in audit to
non-production of records by ULBs. DSA further stated that surcharge certificates for
`21,106 in respect of two cases were issued during the year 2016-17.
The consolidated Audit and Review Report for the year 2011-12 was tabled in the State
Legislature on 30 March 2016. Some of the major findings observed in 2011-12 report
relate to excess utilisation/non-utilisation/diversion/mis-utilisation of grants, non-
collection of taxes and fee, advances pending adjustment etc. DSA stated
(October 2017) that consolidation of the Reports for the years 2012-13 to 2016-17 was
under progress.
3.8.2 Audit by Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG)
Based on recommendations of the Eleventh Finance Commission, State Government
entrusted (August 2004) to CAG, the responsibility for providing Technical Guidance
and Supervision (TGS) in connection with the accounts and audit of Local Bodies under
section 20(1) of the Act.

9
water supply, sanitation including septic management, sewage and solid waste management, storm
water drainage, maintenance of community assets, maintenance of roads, footpaths, street lighting,
burial and cremation grounds

Page 31
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Based on the test check of ULBs, a consolidated report (TGS note) is prepared at the
end of each financial year and forwarded to the DSA for improving the quality of their
reports. TGS note for the year 2016-17 was issued in August 2017.
Planning and conduct of audit
The Audit process commences with assessment of risks10, based on expenditure
incurred, criticality/complexity of activities and priority accorded to the activity by
Government. It is also based on level of delegated financial powers and assessment of
internal controls and concerns of stakeholders.
Previous audit findings were also considered in this exercise. Based on this risk
assessment, frequency and extent of audit was decided and an annual audit plan was
formulated to conduct audit. During 2016-17, 13 ULBs (two Municipal Corporations11,
seven Municipalities12 and four Nagar Panchayats13), falling under the department of
Municipal Administration and Urban Development, were covered in audit.
Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Local Bodies for the year
ended March 2016 was tabled in the State Legislature on 31 March 2017.
Response to audit observations
After completion of audit, Inspection Reports (IRs) containing audit findings were
issued to heads of the units concerned. Heads of offices and next higher authorities
were required to respond to observations contained in IRs within one month and take
appropriate corrective action. Audit observations communicated in IRs were also
discussed in meetings at district levels by officers of the departments with officers of
Principal Accountant General’s office.
As of November 2017, 150 IRs containing 3,820 paragraphs pertaining to the period up
to 2016-17 were pending settlement as given below. Of these, initial replies had not
been received in respect of 71 IRs and 2,146 paragraphs.
Table 3.5

Year Number of IRs /Paragraphs IRs/Paragraphs where even

pending settlement initial replies have not been
received
IRs Paragraphs IRs Paragraphs
Up to 2015-16 137 3,475 58 1,801
2016-17 13 345 13 345
Total 150 3,820 71 2,146

Lack of action on IRs is fraught with the risk of perpetuating serious financial
irregularities pointed out in these reports remaining unaddressed.

10
of departments/local bodies/schemes/programmes, etc.
11
Kakinada and Srikakulam Municipal Corporations
12
Amalapuram, Jaggayyapeta, Kandukur, Markapur, Pullivendula, Sullurpet and Tuni Municipalities
13
Nellimarla, Palakonda, Puttaparthi and Rajam Nagar Panchayats

Page 32
 Chapter – III –An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of
Urban Local Bodies

Section B
Accountability framework and Financial reporting issues

3.9 Accounting framework

3.9.1 Ombudsman
The Thirteenth Finance Commission recommended establishment of an independent
Local Body Ombudsman System. Independent Ombudsman System was not adopted
in the State. However amendments were made to the existing AP Lokayukta Act, 1983
to cover all the elected members of the Municipal bodies.
3.9.2 Social Audit
Social Audit setup was yet to be constituted for programmes/schemes implemented by
Department of Municipal Administration & Urban Development (MA&UD) as of
November 2017.
3.9.3 Property Tax Board
The Thirteenth Finance Commission stipulated that State Government must constitute
a Property Tax Board (PTB). PTB was to assist all ULBs to put in place an independent
and transparent procedure for assessing Property Tax. Accordingly, State Government
had issued (March 2011) orders for constituting PTB. The Andhra Pradesh
Municipalities Act, 1965 was amended (2012) to bring the Legislative framework for
the functioning of Andhra Pradesh State Property Tax Board.
State Government sanctioned (October 2013) 28 posts for effective functioning of the
PTB. Against the sanctioned 28 posts, 24 posts were lying vacant (as of May 2017).
3.9.4 Service Level Benchmark
The Thirteenth Finance Commission had stipulated that State Government must notify
or cause the ULBs to notify the service standards of four core sectors14 to be achieved
by them by the end of fiscal year. State Government fixed the targets for the year
2014-15 (March 2014). From 2015-16 onwards, ULBs were directed to publicise the
Service Level Benchmarks by themselves. All the ULBs in the State have fixed the
targets for the year 2016-17 in respect of four core sectors. None of the test-checked
ULBs furnished the details of achievements against the SLB targets set.
3.9.5 Fire hazard response
Guidelines of the Thirteenth Finance Commission stipulated that all Municipal
Corporations with a population of more than one million, must put in place a fire hazard
response and mitigation plan. A gazette notification to this effect was to be issued by
the State Government demonstrating compliance. Accordingly, State Government
notified annually, the fire hazard response and mitigation plans to be implemented upto
2014-15. State Government did not issue notifications for the subsequent years.

14
water supply, sewerage, storm water drainage and solid waste management

Page 33
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

3.10 Submission of Utilization Certificates (UCs)

Scheme guidelines of Centrally Sponsored Schemes and Central Finance Commissions
stipulate that departmental officers should obtain UCs from the grantees. The UCs
should be forwarded to GoI after due verification of the same. Records of 13
test-checked ULBs showed that in respect of two15 ULBs, UCs for an amount of
`3.68 crore (pertaining to the period 2010-11 to 2016-17) were not furnished as of
March 2017.
3.11 Internal Audit and Internal Control system of ULBs
Records of 13 ULBs during 2016-17 showed that in respect of seven16 ULBs, Internal
Audit was not conducted. One ULB (Tuni Municipality) stated that Internal Audit was
conducted quarterly, however, records in support of the same were not furnished to
audit despite specific request.
3.12 Maintenance of Records
Every Drawing and Disbursing Officer should maintain a Cash Book as prescribed in
Andhra Pradesh Treasury Code (APTC). Test check of 13 ULBs during 2016-17
showed that in five17 ULBs cash book was not properly maintained18 as stipulated.
3.12.1 Advances pending adjustment
As per Andhra Pradesh Financial Code, advances paid should be adjusted without any
delay and the Drawing and Disbursing Officers concerned should watch their
adjustment. Records of 13 ULBs audited during 2016-17, showed that advances of
`1.66 crore, paid to staff in six ULBs19 for various purposes during the period 2000-17,
remained unadjusted as of March 2017.
3.12.2 Non-reconciliation of departmental figures with treasury
As per paragraph 19.6 of Andhra Pradesh Budget Manual, DDOs are required to
reconcile departmental receipts and expenditure with those booked in the treasury every
month to avoid any misclassification and fraudulent drawals. Records of 13
test-checked ULBs showed that reconciliation was pending from the year 2012-13
onwards in respect of three ULBs20.
3.12.3 Unspent balances in bank accounts of closed schemes
Scheme guidelines stipulate surrender of unspent amount into Government account in
respect of closed schemes. State level authorities of the schemes concerned and CDMA
should watch the balances of closed schemes lying in the accounts of different ULBs.

15
Tuni: `1.74 crore and Amalapuram: `1.94 crore
16
Amalapuram, Jaggaiahpeta, Kandukur, Markapur, Palakonda, Pulivendula and Puttaparthi
17
Amalapuram, Jaggaiahpeta, Srikakulam, Sullurpet and Tuni
18
Non-attestation of monthly closing, non-reconciliation by DDOs etc.
19
Kakinada: `84.30 lakh, Kandukuru: `1.53 lakh, Palakonda: `3.68 lakh, Pulivendula: `1.96 lakh,
Srikakulam: `64.70 lakh and Tuni: `9.33 lakh
20
Markapur, Puttaparthi and Sullurupet

Page 34
 Chapter – III –An overview of the functioning and financial reporting issues of
Urban Local Bodies

Records of 13 test-checked ULBs during 2016-17 showed that an amount of `4.33 crore
pertaining to closed schemes21 in five22 ULBs remained unspent as of March 2017.
3.12.4 Cases of misappropriation
Andhra Pradesh Financial Code stipulates responsibilities of Government servants in
dealing with Government money, the procedure for fixing responsibility and recovery
of any loss. State Government had ordered (February 2004) the Secretaries of all the
departments to review cases of misappropriation on a monthly basis. The Chief
Secretary to Government was to review these cases once in six months with all the
Secretaries concerned. However, information regarding conduct of such reviews were
not furnished to audit despite specific request. Hence, Audit concludes that the required
reviews were not carried out. As of March 2017, misappropriation cases noticed by
Director, State Audit which were pending from 1991-92 for disposal are detailed below:
Table 3.6
(` in lakhs)

Unit As of 31 March 201723

No. of cases Amount
Municipal Corporations 59 265.80
Municipalities 79 680.30
Nagar Panchayats 7 6.52
Total 145 952.62
Source: Information furnished by Director, State Audit
Urgent action needs to be taken by Government in this regard.
3.13 Maintenance of Accounts by ULBs
The ULBs adopted the software developed by the Centre for Good Governance of
Model Accounting System for maintenance of accounts. CDMA stated
(September 2017) that the Double Entry Accrual Based Accounting System (DEABAS)
was being adopted in all the 110 ULBs. The State Audit Department had audited the
annual accounts of all the ULBs for the financial year upto 2015-16. Audit of annual
accounts of 2016-17 was in progress.

21
Swarn Jayanti Rojgar Yojana, 12th Finance Commission Grants, Paavala Vaddi etc.
22
Amalapuram: `2.34 crore, Kakinada: `1.50 crore, Rajam: `0.02 crore, Srikakulam:`0.18 crore and
Tuni:`0.29 crore
23
No information has been provided in respect of misappropriation cases for the year 2016-17

Page 35
 Chapter – IV
Performance Audit

Pages 37-52
 Chapter – IV –Performance Audit on Tirupati Municipal Corporation

Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department

4 Tirupati Municipal Corporation

4.1 Introduction
Tirupati is a major pilgrim city located in Chittoor district of Andhra Pradesh. Tirupati
Municipality was upgraded as Tirupati Municipal Corporation (TMC) in March 2007.
TMC is spread over an area of 27.44 Sq. km with 23 Revenue Wards and 50 Election
Wards. The population of TMC was 3.74 lakh as per 2011 Census. TMC is
responsible for provision of civic amenities and infrastructure facilities in the
Corporation area.
4.2 Organisational set up
Tirupati Municipal Corporation (TMC) is under overall administrative control of the
Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (MA&UD) at
State Government level. At the Departmental level, the Commissioner and Director
of Municipal Administration (CDMA) is the administrative in-charge of the TMC.
The Municipal Commissioner is the executive head of TMC and is supported by
Additional Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner.
4.3 Audit framework
4.3.1 Audit objectives
Performance Audit of Tirupati Municipal Corporation was carried out in selected areas
(Property Tax, Building Permission Fee, Trade License Fee, Rents from shopping
complex, Drainage system and Street lighting) for assessing whether:
i) the assessment, collection and accountal of Property Tax, Building Permission Fee,
Trade License Fee and Rents from shopping complexes were effectively carried
out;
ii) Drainage system was adequate and
iii) Street lighting was adequately provided.
4.3.2 Audit criteria
Audit findings were benchmarked against the criteria sourced from the following:
• AP Municipal Corporation, Act, 1994
• Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (HMC) Act 1955 (Section 14 of AP Municipal
Corporation Act, 1994 provides that all the provisions of HMC Act shall be
applied mutatis mutandis to corporations constituted under this Act)
• AP Financial Code & A.P. Public Works Code
• Bye-laws and Council Resolutions of Tirupati Municipal Corporation
• Master Plan and City Development Plan
• Relevant scheme/project guidelines and Service Level Benchmarks
• Orders issued by Government from time to time

Page 37
 Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

4.3.3 Audit sample

Five per cent of number of cases assessed/works executed during 2012-17 in respect
of Property Tax1, Trade License Fee2, Building Permission Fee3 and Storm water
drains4 were selected for conducting Performance Audit. All the cases in respect of
rents from Shopping Complexes (100 per cent) were selected and examined.
25 per cent of cases pertaining to Street Lighting were selected as sample and
examined.
4.3.4 Audit scope and methodology
Performance Audit of TMC was conducted between February-June 2017 covering the
period 2012-17. Audit methodology involved issue of audit enquiries and scrutiny of
relevant records/documents at the Office of Commissioner of TMC. An Entry
Conference was held (January 2017) with the representatives of the
Department/Corporation wherein audit objectives, scope, criteria and methodology
were explained. Exit Conference was held with the Government representatives in
November 2017 to discuss audit findings. Replies (November 2017) of the State
Government have been suitably incorporated in the report.
4.3.5 Acknowledgement
Audit acknowledges the co-operation and assistance extended by the Tirupati
Municipal Corporation and its officials during the conduct of this audit.
4.4 Funding
Under AP Municipal Corporation Act, 1994, TMC is empowered to generate its own
revenue by levy and collection of Property Tax, Trade License Fee, etc. Expenditure
towards Street Lighting and Drainage System was met from own resources. Receipts
and Expenditure of TMC in selected areas for the period 2012-17 are given below:
Table 4.1
Statement showing the receipts and expenditure details during 2012-17
(` in crore)
Year Property Tax Trade License Building Rents from Drainage Street Lighting
Permission Fee Shopping System
Complexes
BE Actuals BE Actuals BE Actuals BE Actuals BE Actuals BE Actuals
2012-13 25.41 21.35 0.90 1.80 1.51 3.60 0.85 0.91 2.00 1.40 3.16 1.96
2013-14 31.26 25.44 1.28 1.09 5.05 2.50 1.40 1.02 4.93 6.08 5.15 4.87
2014-15 30.96 29.80 1.40 1.78 6.31 2.36 1.20 1.20 4.80 6.35 11.25 6.25
2015-16 38.33 33.63 1.90 0.87 14.47 0.60 1.50 1.30 7.82 1.21 13.15 4.90
2016-17 42.16 36.10 1.50 0.61 7.45 0.07 1.70 1.19 5.69 8.48 6.07 0.00
Total 168.12 146.32 6.98 6.15 34.79 9.13 6.65 5.62 25.24 23.52 38.78 17.98
Source: Information furnished by TMC; BE: Budget Estimates

1
Property Tax: 230 cases (5 per cent of 3,545 plus 50 cases of newly merged Panchayats)
2
Trade License: 230 cases (5 per cent of 4,604)
3
Building Permission: 74 cases (5 per cent of 1,481)
4
Drains: 30 cases (5 per cent of 604)

Page 38
 Chapter – IV –Performance Audit on Tirupati Municipal Corporation

It was noticed that Property Tax which is the main source of income was short realised
throughout the review period against the budget estimates. Trade License Fee was
realised more than the budget provision in the year 2012-13 only. It came down in the
subsequent years. Realisation of Building Permission fee showed declining trend.
Variation was noticed between budget and expenditure in respect of street lighting and
drainage systems. This indicated that the budget estimates were not realistic
(Appendix- 4.1). Unrealistic budget estimates would affect the maintenance of
services.
Audit Findings
Receipts of Corporation
4.5 Property Tax
Property Tax (PT), levied on the buildings, is the main source of income. As per
Section 264 of the Act, Property Tax shall be payable on half-yearly basis.
Components of the Property Tax are i) general tax ii) water tax iii) drainage tax
iv) lighting tax and v) conservancy tax. Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation
is the assessing authority for fixation of Property Tax on all buildings in the
Corporation area.
4.5.1 Assessment, collection and accountal of Property Tax
4.5.1.1 Comprehensive database
According to Section 199 of HMC Act, Property Tax (PT) shall be levied on all
buildings in the city at such percentage as may be fixed by the corporation.
Maintenance of complete and accurate data on all assessable public and private
properties5 would enable raising a proper demand. Such information would serve as
an effective aid for creating centralized database and also facilitate the ULB to detect
unassessed/unauthorized structures.
TMC had no comprehensive database of all assessable properties. Audit observed that
properties were identified by TMC only when the owners approached the TMC or
whenever the revenue officials identified new properties during their regular visits of
corporation area. As per data available, there were 64,328 assessed properties in TMC
limits as of March 2017. Deviations/unauthorised constructions were noticed in
2,313 assessments. Out of 230 test checked properties, deviations/unauthorised
constructions were noticed in 129 cases (56 per cent).
As per JNNURM6 guidelines, TMC has to adopt e-governance using IT applications
like Geographic Information System (GIS) for effective realization of PT so that PT
becomes major source of revenue. However, TMC has not done the GIS mapping of
the properties. Thus, there was scope for un-assessed properties.

5
such as residential and non-residential properties including Central, State Government properties, and
properties of autonomous and corporate bodies
6
Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission

Page 39
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

State Government stated (November 2017) that an agreement was concluded with an
agency for GIS mapping/updation of database and assured that all the un-assessed
properties would be covered.
4.5.1.2 Assessment and levy
According to Section 210 of HMC Act when any building is newly erected or re-
erected, or when any building which has been vacant is re-occupied, the person
primarily liable for the property taxes assessed on the building shall, within fifteen
days give notice thereof in writing to the Commissioner. Further, the said period of
fifteen days shall be counted from the date of the completion or of the occupation
whichever first occurs. Audit test-checked assessment and levy of Property Tax in
respect of 230 properties during the review period. Of these, in 100 cases audit noticed
delay in bringing the properties into PT net after completion of construction. The
delay ranged from one to four years. Audit assessed loss of revenue of `1.18 crore as
of March 2017 (Appendix- 4.2).
4.5.1.3 Non-revision of Annual Rental Value
According to Rule 7 (5) of the HMC (Assessment of Property Tax) Rules, 1990, the
rates of monthly or yearly rents for each category of building in a zone shall be revised
once in five years for assessment of Property Tax. Annual Rental Value (ARV) on
residential buildings fixed in the year 2002 was not revised as of June 2017. ARV on
non-residential buildings fixed in the year 2007 was also not revised as of June 2017.
Non-compliance to Act provisions would affect the financial position of the TMC as
PT is the major source of income to ULBs.
4.5.1.4 Incorrect assessment under Building Penalisation Scheme
Building Penalisation Scheme (BPS) was introduced in May 2015 for regulation and
penalization of un-authorised buildings and buildings constructed in deviation to the
sanctioned plans. On receipt of the application along with required documents and
plans, the Competent Authority shall scrutinize the application. After carrying out
necessary site inspection, the competent authority would communicate its approval or
rejection to the applicant as early as possible but not beyond six months from the date
of receipt of application.
Audit test-checked 30 BPS cases and noticed the following:
1. In six cases, plinth area showed in the PT assessment was less than the plinth area
assessed for regulation under BPS. Variation ranged from 18.84 Sq. mts. to
119.72 Sq. mts. This resulted in short assessment of `0.99 lakh towards
PT (Appendix- 4.3) as of March 2017. On the other hand, in 18 cases
(Appendix- 4.4), the plinth area as per PT assessments was higher than that
mentioned in BPS. Variation ranged from 4.17 Sq. mts to 1,708.83 Sq. mts. This
indicated that BPS proceedings were made without physical verification of the
building.

Page 40
 Chapter – IV –Performance Audit on Tirupati Municipal Corporation

2. In four cases (Appendix- 4.5), house numbers mentioned in the BPS proceedings
were not traceable in the database of properties maintained by TMC. This
confirms that data available with TMC was not comprehensive.
State Government replied (November 2017) that assessments under BPS were made
based on the information furnished by the applicants. The reply is not satisfactory as
the Government Orders (May 2015) on the BPS scheme stipulates that competent
authority shall scrutinize the application, and after carrying out necessary site
inspection only it should communicate the approval.
4.5.1.5 Occupancy Certificate
According to Andhra Pradesh Building Rules 2012, Occupancy Certificate (OC) shall
be mandatory for all buildings. No person shall occupy or allow any other person to
occupy any building or part of a building for any purpose unless such building has
been granted an Occupancy Certificate by the sanctioning authority. Obtaining the
occupancy certificates is optional in respect of individual buildings having the plot
size upto 100 Sq.mts. and height up to 7 meters. The functional/line agencies dealing
with electric power, water supply, drainage and sewerage shall not give regular
connections to the building unless such OC is produced or alternatively may charge
three times the tariff till such time OC is produced. In addition to the above, the local
body shall collect every year two times the Property Tax, as penalty, from the
owners/occupants till such time the occupancy certificate is obtained. Scrutiny of the
OC records showed the following.
i. In 196 (85 per cent) cases out of 230 cases of PT assessments test-checked,
buildings were constructed in the plot of area exceeding 100 Sq. mts for which
occupancy certificates were not issued by the TMC. The TMC had not levied
penalty at the rate of two times of the Property Tax. Audit assessed loss of
revenue as `11.32 crore as of March 2017.
ii. Out of the 2,168 Building Permission applications received during the period
2012-17, Corporation approved 1,481 applications. However, only four
occupancy certificates were issued by the corporation.
State Government did not furnish specific reply.
4.5.1.6 Exemptions from Property Tax
As per Section 202 and 202-A of HMC Act, 1955, General Tax7 shall be exempted in
respect of buildings owned and used as recognized educational institutions including
hostels and charitable hospitals. As per section 214 of the Act, Commissioner is the
competent authority to grant exemption from levy of general tax.
Data for the period 2012-17 pertaining to buildings exempted from PT showed that
the TMC had given exemption of `0.25 crore in respect 352 buildings. Out of this,

7
One of the components of Property Tax

Page 41
 Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

TMC did not record reasons for granting exemptions of `0.12 crore in respect of 79
properties. As such, eligibility of exemptions for 79 properties could not be ensured.
State Government replied (November 2017) that concerned authorities would be
addressed to accord exemptions according to the provisions of the HMC Act.
4.5.1.7 Collection of Property Tax
Collection of taxes is watched through Demand, Collection and Balance (DCB)
register, including current and arrear position. Year-wise details of demands raised
and actual collections during 2012-17 are given below:
Table 4.2
Statement showing the demand, collection and balances of Property Tax
(` in crore)
Year Demand Collection Balance
Arrear Current Total Arrear Current Total Arrear Current Total
2012-13 9.54 22.07 31.61 2.74 18.61 21.35 6.81 3.46 10.27
2013-14 12.49 22.54 35.03 6.24 19.20 25.44 6.25 3.35 9.60
2014-15 12.84 31.67 44.51 3.20 26.60 29.80 9.64 5.08 14.72
2015-16 30.15 34.69 64.84 4.47 29.16 33.63 25.69 5.52 31.21
2016-17 30.76 39.79 70.55 3.11 32.99 36.10 27.64 6.80 34.44
Total 95.78 150.76 246.54 19.76 126.56 146.32 76.03 24.21 100.24
Source: Information furnished by the Commissioner, TMC
TMC achieved 84 per cent in collection of current demand of Property Tax. However,
collection of arrear demand was poor (21 per cent) during the review period of
2012-17. Out of the total arrear demand of `95.78 crore, only `19.76 crore was
collected. TMC had not adhered to the penal8 provisions stipulated in the Act for
effective realization of the arrears, except levy of penalty at the rate of two per cent of
PT. Further, the closing balance was not carried forward as opening balance in
subsequent year during any of the financial years of the review period. As such the
DCB statement did not depict the true picture. Further, as per online data furnished
(April 2017) by TMC to MAUD, an amount of `41.04 crore was outstanding as on
31st March 2017, while an amount of `34.44 crore was shown as outstanding as per
DCB.
State Government replied (November 2017) that steps would be taken for the collection
of arrears. Further, in respect of the difference between online data and DCB
Government assured that the same would be reconciled.

8
a) Section 269(2) of HMC Act, 1955-For non-payment of property tax on or before due date:
(i) penalty of 2 per cent interest per month to be imposed; or (ii) disconnect the essential services; or
(iii) confiscate the movable articles of the defaulter, b) Section 238 of HMC Act, 1955-Collection of
arrears of Property Tax under the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act (RR Act) and c) Section
278 HMC Act, 1955-Suing the defaulters in court of law

Page 42
 Chapter – IV –Performance Audit on Tirupati Municipal Corporation

4.5.1.8 Short remittance of Library Cess

The Property Tax together with Library Cess and Education Tax shall not exceed
25 per cent and 33 per cent of ARV in respect of residential and non-residential
properties respectively. According to section 20(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Libraries
Act, 1960 every Zilla Grandhalaya Samstha (ZGS) shall levy in its area, Library Cess
in the form of a surcharge on the Property Tax to provide better library facilities.
Library Cess shall be collected at the rate of 1.52 per cent and 2.08 per cent of the PT
respectively on residential and non-residential properties. The amount of Library Cess
collected by the local bodies shall be paid to the Zilla Grandhalaya Samstha for the
purpose of providing better library facilities to the public. During the period 2012-17,
TMC had collected PT to a tune of `146.32 crore. Out of this, TMC had to remit
`7.70 crore9 to ZGS. Against this, TMC had remitted an amount of `6.32 crore only
leaving a balance of `1.38 crore. Thus, TMC failed to remit the amount promptly to
ZGS.
State Government replied (November 2017) that the balance amount of Library Cess
would be remitted.
4.5.1.9 Non-remittance of Education Tax
According to Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982, Education Tax shall be levied by
the ULBs at such rates as may be considered necessary. It is an addition to the taxation
levied in the ULBs under the head of Property Tax for the purpose of providing
educational facilities within its jurisdiction. Education Tax shall be levied at
4.20 per cent and 4.00 per cent of the PT respectively on residential and non-
residential properties.
TMC realised an amount of `21.04 crore towards Education Tax during the period
2012-17. The same was not remitted to Government account in violation of the Act
provisions. Thus, the intended objective of providing educational infrastructural
facilities in the corporation area was not achieved.
State Government replied (November 2017) that the amount collected was being
utilised for the maintenance of schools which were under the control of the TMC. The
reply is not acceptable as the same has to be remitted to Government account.
4.6 Trade Licence Fee
Various trades are identified for which trade licence fee is to be collected by the ULBs
for running the listed business. The Municipal Council shall fix licence fee for various
trades. The council shall issue a notification to the effect that no premises within
municipal limits shall be used for any or more of the purposes specified therein without
a licence. The Public Health wing in TMC is responsible for regulating the trades and
ensure that no trade is run without a licence from TMC.

9
85 per cent of total Library cess of `9.07 crore

Page 43
 Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

4.6.1 Assessment, collection and accountal of Trade License Fee

4.6.1.1 Assessment of Trade Licences
Scrutiny of trade licence fee in respect of 230 test-checked trade licences showed that
69 properties (30 per cent), wherein trades10 have been carried out, were not assessed
for PT. TMC assessed the PT in respect of premises of 10 trade licences as residential
instead of commercial. In respect of 56 trade licences, House numbers were not
mentioned, in the absence of which, audit could not ensure the levy of PT. This
indicated that there was no co-ordination between Public Health wing, which deals
with the issue of trade licences and revenue wing to ensure that all buildings for which
trade licences were issued, were brought into PT net.
State Government replied (November 2017) that the matter would be referred to
revenue wing of the TMC for examination of the cases.
4.6.1.2 Revision of Trade Licence Fee
The licence fee for trades under section 622(2) of HMC Act, 1955 was fixed in
2010-1111, keeping in view the increase in service charges rendered by TMC. Licence
fee is based on rental value of the property and can be subsequently enhanced by the
Commissioner with the sanction of the Corporation. Such enhancement shall be made
from time to time. Scrutiny of records revealed that TMC did not review the trade
licence fee for subsequent revision.
State Government assured (November 2017) that Municipal Council would be
requested to review the trade licence fees structure.
4.6.1.3 Collection of Trade License Fee
Year-wise details of demand raised and actual collection during 2012-17 are as
follows:
Table 4.3
Statement showing the demand, collection and balances of Trade Licence Fee
(` in crore)
Year No. of Demand Collection Balance
trade Arrear Current Total Arrear Current Total Arrear Current Total
licenses
2012-13 5,809 0.10 1.80 1.90 0.00 1.80 1.80 0.10 0.00 0.10
2013-14 8,010 0.52 0.94 1.46 0.15 0.94 1.09 0.37 0.00 0.37
2014-15 8,010 0.52 1.62 2.14 0.16 1.62 1.78 0.36 0.00 0.36
2015-16 8,876 0.43 1.00 1.43 0.00 0.87 0.87 0.43 0.13 0.56
2016-17 9,647 0.00 1.13 1.13 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.52 0.52
Total: 1.57 6.49 8.06 0.31 5.84 6.15 1.26 0.65 1.91
Source: DCB statements

10
Floor mills, rice mills, bakery, making of ice creams, offset printing press etc.
11
As per Section 622(2) of HMC Act, 1955 read with Gazette Notification of TMC dated 05-01-2010

Page 44
 Chapter – IV –Performance Audit on Tirupati Municipal Corporation

From the above table, Audit observed that performance of TMC in collection of current
demand ranged from 54 per cent (2016-17) to 100 per cent (2012-15). TMC
performance in collection of arrears ranged from 0 per cent (2012-13 and 2015-16) to
31 per cent (2014-15) only. Closing balance was not carried forward as opening
balance in subsequent year during any of the financial years of the review period.
Further, demand raised and trade licence fee collected dropped by 66 per cent, even
though number of trade licenses had increased by 66 per cent during 2012-17. This
showed that the system of levy and collection of trade licence fee was not effective.
This further substantiated the fact of lack of co-ordination between Public Health wing,
which deals with the issue of trade license fee and revenue wings of the Corporation.
State Government did not furnish specific reply.
4.7 Shopping Complexes

Year-wise details of demand raised, actual collection and balances of rent from shopping
complexes during 2012-17 are given in Table 4.4:
Table 4.4
Demand, collection and balances of rents from shopping complexes
(` in crore)
Year No of Demand Collection Balance
shops Arrear Current Total Arrear Current Total Arrear Current Total
2012-13 404 0.00 1.14 1.14 0.00 0.91 0.91 0.00 0.23 0.23
2013-14 272 0.23 1.04 1.27 0.08 0.94 1.02 0.15 0.10 0.25
2014-15 274 0.25 1.11 1.36 0.09 1.11 1.20 0.16 0.00 0.16
2015-16 263 0.16 1.52 1.68 0.00 1.30 1.30 0.16 0.22 0.38
2016-17 263 0.00 1.70 1.70 0.00 1.19 1.19 0.00 0.51 0.51
Total 0.64 6.51 7.15 0.17 5.45 5.62 0.47 1.06 1.53
Source: DCB Statements of TMC
From the above table, Audit observed that performance of TMC in collection of current
demand ranged from 70 per cent (2016-17) to 100 per cent (2014-15). TMC
performance in collection of arrears ranged from 0 per cent (2015-16) to 36 per cent
(2014-15) only. Collection of arrears was poor even though collection of current
demand was satisfactory.
State Government assured (November 2017) that stringent action would be initiated for
realization of arrears of rent from the lessees.
4.7.1 Loss of revenue
TMC has constructed Municipal shopping complex consisting of 10 shops12 in 2011,
at a cost of `18.91 lakh. Corporation had conducted auctions four times during

12
at Damineedu under Integrated Housing Slum Development Programme (IHSDP)

Page 45
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

2012-15. However, only four shops were occupied and remaining six shops were still
vacant (as of April 2017). This resulted in loss of revenue to a tune of `2.43 lakh.
TMC replied (June 2017) that even though auctions were conducted, public had not
come forward to participate. This showed that TMC did not conduct proper demand
survey of the market before selection of site for construction of the shopping complex.
This resulted in unfruitful expenditure on construction of shops.
Audit scrutiny of records showed that seven shops (out of 253 shops) in three
Municipal shopping complexes of TMC were vacant for a long period ranging from 2
to 34 months (Appendix- 4.6). This resulted in loss of revenue to an extent of
`8.17 lakh.
State Government stated (November 2017) that in spite of conducting auctions several
times the shops were not occupied as there was no demand for the same. The reply
only confirmed that proper demand survey was not conducted before selection of the
site.
4.8 Building Permissions
In addition to civic functions and welfare programmes, ULBs are entrusted with certain
regulatory functions relating to Town Planning such as approval of layouts, approval
of Building Plans, etc. ULBs shall collect Town Planning Fee and Charges such as
Building Permission Fee, Open Space Contribution Charges, Betterment Charges, etc.,
for granting permissions which form source of revenue to them. The Director of Town
and Country Planning issued instructions (February 2013) to adopt uniform rates.
Accordingly, TMC revised town planning fee and charges through Gazette Notification
(June 2013). TMC collected an amount of `9.1313 crore towards Betterment and
Development Charges, Building Permission Fee and encroachment fee during the
period of 2012-17.
4.8.1 Issue of Building permissions without collection of applicable
charges
As per Andhra Pradesh Regulation of Unapproved and Illegal Layout Rules 2007,
Urban Development Authority (UDA) shall collect applicable charges14 in case of
areas falling under their jurisdiction. As per section 27 of the Urban Areas
(Development) Act, 1975 UDA shall levy development charges in cases where
permission for use of land or building was sought for. During the test check of
building permission cases, Audit observed that TMC issued building permission
proceedings without ensuring collection of applicable charges by UDA, as detailed
under:

13
2012-13: `3.60 crore, 2013-14: `2.50 crore, 2014-15: `2.36 crore, 2015-16: `0.60 crore and 2016-17:
`0.07 crore.
14
Open Space Contribution, Betterment Charges and Development Charges. These charges shall be
released for developmental works in respective Municipal Corporations based on the policies of the
Government.

Page 46
 Chapter – IV –Performance Audit on Tirupati Municipal Corporation

i. According to the gazette notification issued by the Corporation (June 2013),

open space contribution15 was to be collected from the applicants who applied
for construction in unapproved layouts. In five cases, an amount of `2.27 crore
(Appendix-4.7) towards Open Space Contribution was not collected.
ii. Similarly, Betterment Charges16 were to be collected from the building
permission applicants who applied for construction in unapproved layouts.
However, audit observed that, in nine cases, an amount of `0.15 crore
(Appendix-4.8) towards Betterment Charges was not collected.
iii. As per Government orders (June 2007) the development charges were to be
collected from the building permission applicant’s as per site area and built up
area. Audit noticed that in 25 cases, an amount of `0.24 crore (Appendix-4.9)
was short collected towards Development charges.
State Government replied (November 2017) that matter had been referred to town
planning wing for field verification and collection of balances due.
4.8.2 Rain Water Harvesting Scheme (RWHS)
As per revised schedule of Town Planning Fee and Charges issued (February 2013)
by the Director of Town and Country Planning, Andhra Pradesh, the Rain Water
Harvesting (RWH) Charges (Deposit) at `25 per square meter are to be collected from
each applicant seeking approval for house plan. The amounts so collected shall be
kept as deposit and refunded to the applicants who constructed RWH pits. Otherwise,
the Corporation has to undertake construction of RWH pits with the amount collected.
An amount of `0.43 crore was collected under RWHS from the applicants during the
period 2012-17. Scrutiny of records revealed that the amount collected was kept as
deposit during 2012-13 and incorrectly credited to General fund during the period
2013-17.
State Government replied (November 2017) that in addition to the amount collected
under RWHS an additional amount from General fund was also spent on digging RWH
pits in the TMC area. However, during joint physical verification of 10 buildings, for
which TMC had accorded building permissions during the period 2011-16, RWH pits
were not found in the premises of any of the building.
4.8.3 Labour Cess
According to Government Orders (December 2009) all the departments/Local
Bodies/Authorities had to ensure that one per cent Labour Cess on the Estimated Cost
of Construction of the building works17 are received by them before they approve plans
for Building and Other Construction Works. However, it was observed in 64 out of
74 test-checked cases that Corporation had short collected an amount of `0.77 crore

15
at 14 per cent of the present market value of the land.
16
`120 per square meter for residential and `150 per square meter for non-residential purposes
17
Construction, maintenance, repair or demolition of any building which is designed to be or is or has
been more than one storey in height above the ground or twelve feet or more from the ground level
to the apex of the roof

Page 47
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

towards Labour Cess as detailed in Appendix- 4.10. The short collection of cess would
affect the intended objective of providing welfare measures to construction workers.
State Government replied (November 2017) that the subject matter had been taken up
with the Labour Department.
Expenditure
4.9 Drainage System
TMC is spread over an area of 27.44 Sq. km. Based on the topography of the town,
drainage system in TMC area was divided into five zones. Zones I, II & III cover the
core area of the city. Zones IV & V were amalgamated with TMC in July 2013. Fourth
zone has been further divided into Zone IV, IVA and IVB.
4.9.1 Drainage network
Against the requirement of 580 Kms of open drain length in the Corporation area,
TMC provided open drains in 450 kms only. State Government replied
(November 2017) that the finalization of DPRs were under progress.
Thus, it was evident that the open drains were not provided for the entire road length.
4.9.2 House Service Connections
1. The core area of the TMC was provided (1994) with comprehensive Underground
Drainage (UGD) system with Housing and Urban Development Corporation
(HUDCO) assistance of `35.88 crore. However, Audit noticed a large pendency in
providing House Service Connections (HSCs) even after 23 years of providing
UGD. Out of 91,811 households in the core area, only 22,354 (24 per cent)
households were connected to sewerage network and 58,457 (64 per cent)
households were still having septic tanks. Further, 11,000 (12 per cent) households
were neither connected to sewerage network nor had septic tanks. This resulted in
letting out of waste water into open drains which reached water bodies causing
environmental hazards.
State Government stated (November 2017) that strict enforcement would be
introduced for taking up UGD connections. Remaining connections would be
completed by conducting public awareness programmes.
2. TMC had taken up the Underground Drainage project with estimated value of
`19 crore covering eastern side of Tirumala Bypass Road. The project was stated
to have been completed (March 2013) under JNNURM funds at a cost of
`21.7118 crore. Public Health Engineering Department (PHED), the implementing
agency transferred (December 2014) the UGD project to TMC. As per completion
reports of the project and deviation statements only 7,572 rmts19 (43 per cent) out
of 17,600 rmts was completed at the time of handing over of the project. Only
3,800 House Service Connections could be provided with the completed length.

18
Excess of `2.71 crore utilized from the savings of Storm Water Drainage (SWD) project.
19
rmts – running meters

Page 48
 Chapter – IV –Performance Audit on Tirupati Municipal Corporation

However, only 592 (16 per cent) HSCs were given leaving a balance of 3,208
(84 per cent) HSCs as of June 2017. The implementing agency attributed the short
execution of pipeline of 10,028 rmts to obstacles and encroachments on the pipeline
alignment. TMC stated that necessary efforts were taken to insist upon the public
to take HSCs and promised (June 2017) to complete the remaining connections by
March 2018. However, no action plan was on record to complete the remaining
length of the project. Similarly no plan was on record to provide HSCs to available
UGD facility.
State Government replied (November 2017) that remaining length of the project
would be taken up under AMRUT20 scheme during 2017-20.
4.9.3 Storm water drains
The main objective of Storm Water Drainage system is to prevent flooding of roads
and low lying areas by disposing off rain water safely. TMC was divided into three
storm water zones comprising 12 drains with a total length of 29.117 kms covering an
area of 2,671.08 hectares. Out of this, though TMC proposed 23.842 kms, it could
execute storm water drains only for 13.308 kms, leaving a balance of 10.534 kms
without the provision of storm water drains.
4.9.3.1 Unfruitful expenditure on Storm Water Drainage project
The work of construction of Storm Water Drainage (SWD) project for 23.842 kms of
Tirupati area was taken up with estimated value of `46.82 crore under JNNURM
funds. PHED executed the work on behalf of TMC. Construction of 13.308 km out
of 23.842 km of SWD was completed (March 2013) with an expenditure of
`30.17 crore, leaving a balance of 10.534 kms as of March 2017. The work was closed
midway and handed over (December 2014) to TMC for further maintenance. PHED
attributed pre-closure of the work to non-removal of encroachments and not obtaining
of forest clearance by TMC.
Since project was not completed in full shape, there was inundation and flooding
during November 2015. Thus, incomplete project resulted in unfruitful expenditure
of `30.17 crore. Further, GoI assistance of `13.47 crore under JNNURM21 could not
be availed due to incomplete work.
State Government replied (November 2017) that due to completion of JNNURM22
period in 2013 the work was pre-closed by the PH department.
4.10 Street Lighting
4.10.1 Classification of streets
Public lighting facilitates safe and easy movement of traffic during night times. The
level and type of lighting adopted for a street is based mainly on the volume of traffic,
both vehicular and pedestrian. As per Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) norms, Street

20
Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation
21
Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission
22
Duration of the Mission period was seven years from the year 2005-06 (i.e. upto 2012-13)

Page 49
 Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

lighting has to be classified23 with reference to the traffic density of the road. However,
the TMC did not classify the roads as per BIS norms and did not prepare the City
Development Plan (CDP) for street lighting.
State Government accepted (November 2017) that roads were not classified as per BIS
norms and stated that preparation of City Development Plan was under progress.
4.10.2 LED streetlight project
The State Government decided (February 2015) to replace the existing conventional
street lights with LED24 based street lighting system in all Urban Local Bodies. The
main objective of the project was implementation of energy efficiency measures in
street lighting. Accordingly, TMC entered into bilateral agreement (April 2015) with
Energy Efficiency Services Limited (EESL)25, at an estimated capital cost of
`7.26 crore. The project was to be completed within a period of 14 weeks (July 2015)
from the date of agreement. The scope of agreement provided that the EESL shall
implement the project with energy efficiency measures26. The scope of agreement
included annual maintenance for seven years and warranty replacement. Further, the
agency shall meet upfront capital cost of the project. Repayment to EESL, in the form
of annuity, will be within the overall expenditure currently incurred by TMC on energy
consumption and maintenance charges. That is, EESL annuity and the electricity bill
post retrofit will be less than the current expenditure on energy consumption. Scrutiny
of records revealed the following:
4.10.2.1 Avoidable expenditure on Current consumption charges
i. As per the agreement conditions, TMC shall issue forthwith ‘Completion
Certificate’ after installation of all LED streetlights in TMC area. The scheduled
date of completion of project was July 2015. However, installation of LED lights
against the existing conventional lights could be completed only in August 2016.
Thus, there was delay in implementation of the project by 12 months. This resulted
in avoidable expenditure of `69.85 lakh towards Current Consumption charges on
street lighting (Appendix- 4.11).
State Government stated (November 2017) that EESL could not complete the work
in time due to shortage of LED lights. The contention of the State Government
was not acceptable as TMC could not levy any penalty upon EESL for delayed
execution of the project as there was no penal clause in the agreement conditions.
ii. As per agreement with EESL, the present current consumption shall be reduced by
50 per cent after installation of LED lamps. The revised energy consumption after
installation of LED lamps was estimated to be reduced to 18,31,751 units per

23
Group A – Main Roads, Group B – Secondary Roads, Group C – Unclassified Roads, Group D –
Bridges and Flyovers, Group E – Town and City Centers, Group F – Roads with special
requirements
24
Light Emitting Diode
25
A joint venture company of PSUs of Ministry of Power
26
replacing the conventional streetlight fixtures &lamps with LED streetlight fixtures& LED lamps

Page 50
 Chapter – IV –Performance Audit on Tirupati Municipal Corporation

year/1,52,646 units per month27. TMC had issued completion certificate in

August 2016, and thereafter it expected monthly current consumption to be below
1,52,646 units. However, during the period from August 2016 to March 2017, the
monthly consumption was above the benchmark (ranging upto 4-21 per cent).
TMC had incurred an expenditure of `9.07 lakh towards excess current
consumption charges as of March 2017 (Appendix- 4.12). Thus, improvement in
efficiency of street lighting was not as expected.
State Government stated (November 2017) that there was a saving of 36 per cent
in current consumption. Prescribed 50 per cent savings could not be achieved as
additional street lights were installed in extended new areas.
However, contention of the Government was not convincing as new areas were
last included in 2013 only and the agreement with EESL was for entire jurisdiction
of TMC which included new areas also.
4.10.2.2 Dismantled conventional lamps and luminaries
As per the agreement condition 4(ix), after dismantling of existing fittings, EESL shall
deposit the same on day-to-day basis against the acknowledgement in writing.
EESL would not have responsibility for safe keeping of the dismantled lights once
they were given back to TMC. During execution of contract the agency had replaced
different categories of 10,576 numbers of conventional lights and fittings. The value
of dismantled lights and fittings was `0.75 crore. It was noticed that the same were
neither accounted for nor taken to stock by TMC as of June 2017, even after
completion of retrofitting (August 2016) with LED lights. Further, dismantled lamps
and luminaries were not tested for their functionality and as they are lying idle with
EESL the possibility of misuse and theft cannot be ruled out. There was also no action
plan with the TMC for safe disposal of the dismantled lamps and luminaries.
State Government accepted (November 2017) that the dismantled conventional lights
were not handed over by EESL.
4.11 Conclusion
Comprehensive database of assessable properties was not maintained. There were
delays in assessment of properties and revision of Property Tax. There was no focus
on collection of arrear Property Tax. There was lack of co-ordination between town
planning and public health wing resulting in properties escaping tax net. Collection of
all charges due was not ensured before according building permissions. House service
connections from completed underground drainage projects were long pending.
Progress of underground/storm water drainage projects was poor. Dismantled

27
As per the cost sheet on the net financial impact

Page 51
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

conventional lamps and luminaries were not accounted for and taken to stock after
implementation of LED streetlight project.
4.12 Recommendations
Comprehensive database of all assessees/lessees should be maintained to improve
the collection of taxes and detection of unauthorized construction/trades.
Appropriate penal provision should be imposed against the chronic defaulters to
reduce huge arrears in Property Tax collections.
Action may be taken to complete the Drainage works to avoid letting of the waste
water and inundation of areas during floods.
Steps should be taken for safe keeping/safe disposal of the dismantled street light
fittings.
State Government accepted (November 2017) the recommendations made by audit.

Page 52
 Chapter – V
Compliance Audit Paragraphs

Pages 53-69
 Chapter V – Compliance Audit Paragraphs

Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department

5.1 Construction and maintenance of internal roads in Urban Local
Bodies

5.1.1 Introduction
As per Twelfth Schedule to the Constitution, ‘roads’ is one of the subjects1 entrusted to
the Urban Local Bodies (ULBs). Roads are necessary for public safety and
convenience. For this purpose, ULBs are required to make provision2 for construction,
maintenance, alteration and improvement of streets, bridges, sub-ways, culverts,
causeways or the like within the jurisdiction of the ULB. The function of a network of
roads is to ensure safe and efficient circulation of traffic in ULBs.

5.1.2 Organizational set-up

The ULBs function under the administrative control of the Principal Secretary,
Municipal Administration and Urban Development (MA & UD) at Government level.
The Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration (CDMA) is the Head of
the Department. ULBs are governed by Councils comprised of elected members. Each
Council is headed by a Chairperson who shall be nominated by the elected members of
the Council. Municipal Commissioner is the executive head of the respective ULB. The
ULBs transact their business as per the provisions of the Acts concerned. The Public
Health and Municipal Engineering Department is responsible for undertaking all capital
works. Maintenance works are looked after by the Engineering wing of ULB.

5.1.3 Audit Approach

Compliance Audit of construction and maintenance of internal roads3 in 114 selected5
ULBs (out of 110 Urban Local Bodies) was conducted during the period
February-June 2017. Audit covered the period 2014-15 to 2016-17. The audit was
carried out with the objective of assessing efficiency and effectiveness of
i) Utilization of funds; and
ii) Award and execution of works.
Audit methodology involved scrutiny of relevant records/documents at the office of the
Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration, selected ULBs and the

1
Article 243W- Twelfth Schedule-Constitution 74th amendment Act,1992
2
Sec.112 (15) and Section 374 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act 1955
3
All roads which are constructed and maintained by Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) are called internal
roads
4
Municipal Corporation : (1) Guntur Municipal Corporation
Municipalities : (1) Adoni (2) Bhimavaram (3) Machilipatnam (4) Nandyal (5) Narasapur
(6) Proddatur (7) Tenali
Nagar Panchayats : (1) Jangareddygudem (2) Mummidivaram and (3) Tiruvuru
5
Sample was selected based on the highest expenditure incurred on construction and maintenance of
internal roads in ULBs

Page 53
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

concerned engineering divisions of Public Health department. In addition, physical

verification of site was also conducted with departmental officials. Photographic
evidence was obtained wherever necessary to substantiate audit findings.
Audit findings were benchmarked against the criteria sourced from

• Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act, 19946, Municipalities Act 1965,

Town Planning Act 1920 (APTP Act),

• A.P. Financial Code & A.P. Public Works Code, A.P. Municipal Accounts &
Asset Manual,

• Indian Road Congress guidelines, Road Development Plans (RDPs), Annual

Development Plans (ADPs), and

• Orders issued by Central / State Government from time to time.

Audit Findings

5.1.4 Utilization of funds

5.1.4.1 Funding of works
Besides having their own resources, ULBs receive grants from State and Central
Governments under Plan/Non-plan, Scheduled Castes Sub-Plan (SCSP)/Tribal Sub-
Plan (TSP) for construction and maintenance of internal roads. ULBs also receive
grants from Finance Commissions. ULBs provide funds for construction of internal
roads in their respective annual budgets. However, Central/State Governments had not
released any specific grant for construction and maintenance of internal roads during
2015-17. Eleven test-checked ULBs spent an amount of `207.01 crore7 on construction
and maintenance of internal roads during the review period.
5.1.4.2 Grant under Scheduled Castes Sub-Plan (SCSP)
An amount of `54.33 crore was released during the years 2015-17 under Scheduled
Castes Sub-Plan to take up works to fill up infrastructural gaps identified in SC
habitations in respect of 11 test-checked ULBs. Out of this, an amount of `38.79 crore
was utilized. Shortfall in utilisation of funds ranged between 17 and 100 per cent in 10
ULBs. Tenali ULB utilized funds in full.
Cases of un-utilised SCSP funds as observed by Audit are detailed below:
1. State Government released `2.49 crore (April 2016) to Guntur Municipal
Corporation (GMC) towards development works. GMC did not utilize the amount
and the same was kept in PD Account.

6
Section 14 of the Act provides that all the provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (HMC)
Act, 1955 shall be applied mutatis and mutandis to Corporations constituted under this Act
7
Own funds: `168.16 crore, State Grants: `38.79 crore, Central Grants: `0.06 crore

Page 54
 Chapter V – Compliance Audit Paragraphs

State Government replied (November 2017) that funds would be utilized for road
works after completion of Underground Drainage scheme, which was in progress.
2. During 2016-17, an amount of `10.038 crore was allocated to Narasapur
Municipality. However, Municipal Council resolved (September 2016 and
February 2017) to take up 29 road works9 costing only `3.26 crore. Even these
works were not executed.
State Government replied (November 2017) that the SCSP Grant was released in
the last week of February. After obtaining administrative and technical sanctions,
the Municipality was to call for tenders. However, due to issue of Council Election
Notification, Municipality could not call for tenders as it would violate the Election
Rules.
Thus, the Municipality failed to initiate action in time to propose infrastructure,
despite availability of funds.
3. Three road works were sanctioned (May 2016) to Bhimavaram Municipality for
`36.40 lakh. Out of this, only one work (`10 lakh) was awarded and was under
progress. The balance two works were still at tender process stage as of April 2017.
Similarly, an amount of `2.29 crore was allocated (December 2016) to the
Municipality for 21 works to fill up the infrastructural gaps identified in SC
localities. Out of 21 works sanctioned (January 2017), 12 were related to roads.
The fund lapsed to Government as none of these works were commenced as of
31 March 2017. Further, an amount of `50 lakh was allocated (December 2016) to
the municipality under Tribal Sub-Plan for one work which was yet to be
commenced.
State Government stated (November 2017) that the municipality could not take up
the works due to insufficient response from bidders and also due to Election Code
of Conduct.
Thus, no amount was utilized by the Municipality as of June 2017.
4. Proddatur Municipality received an amount of `1.92 crore under Plan/Non-Plan
Grant during 2014-15 for construction and maintenance of roads. However, an
amount of `14.43 lakh (eight per cent) was only utilized as of March 2017. Balance
amount of `1.78 crore received under the grant was kept in savings bank account
instead of remitting to the Government.
State Government replied (November 2017) that delay in selection of works
occurred due to non-availability of sufficient engineering staff. State Government
further stated that estimates were prepared for 10 works with an estimated cost of

8
`0.46 crore + additional allocation of `9.57 crore
9
Three works (September 2016) and 26 works (February 2017)

Page 55
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

`78.57 lakh. Government did not furnish the reply for the balance amount
(`99.43 lakh).
5. State Government allocated an amount of `10 crore to Adoni Municipality during
the years 2015-17. Municipality proposed 123 works out of which 72 works
pertained to roads. State Government released (August 2016) an amount of
`5.93 crore. The ULB did not ground the works due to delay in finalization of
tenders. State Government had withdrawn (March 2017) the allocation as it was
not utilized by the ULB. Municipality replied (April 2017) that due to delay in
conducting survey, there was delay in starting the works. The reply was not
acceptable as survey was completed in September 2015 itself.
State Government while accepting audit observation replied (November 2017) that
an amount of `six crore had been allocated (2017-18) to the ULB under SCSP grant
and the works were under progress.
Thus, objective of providing infrastructure facilities in the ULBs, was not achieved to
a large extent, despite availability of funds.
5.1.4.3 Fourteenth Finance Commission Grants
Under 14th Finance Commission, an amount of `8.02 crore was released (2015-17)
towards 97 road works in five10 out of 11 test-checked ULBs. ULBs did not utilize the
fund as the estimates and tenders were not finalized. Mummidivaram ULB utilized a
meagre sum of `0.06 crore for one work only.
Thus, the grant received by the ULBs under 14th Finance Commission remained
unutilized thereby depriving the public of the intended benefits.
State Government accepted the audit observation and stated (November 2017) that
funds would be utilised during 2017-18.
5.1.4.4 Utilization Certificates not submitted
State Government released (2014-15) an amount of `4.4911 crore to three ULBs
(Bhimavaram, Narasapur and Jangareddygudem) for maintenance of Municipal
internal roads. The ULBs were to utilize the amount and submit Utilization Certificates
(UCs) within three months. However, UCs were not submitted by the ULBs.
Thus, by not submitting the UCs, it was not known whether the amount was spent for
the purpose it was intended to.

10
Bhimavaram (5 works - `2.46 crore), Mummidivaram (14 works- `0.95 crore), Narasapur (3 works -
`0.82 crore), Jangareddygudem (42 works - `2.22 crore) and Tiruvuru (33 works - `1.57 crore)
11
Bhimavaram Municipality: `1.67 crore, Narasapur Municipality: `0.69 crore and for
Jangareddygudem Nagar Panchayat: `2.13 crore

Page 56
 Chapter V – Compliance Audit Paragraphs

State Government assured (November 2017) that UCs would be obtained from
concerned ULBs.

5.1.5 Award and execution of works

5.1.5.1 Splitting of works
As per Government orders (July 2003) works are to be technically sanctioned by
competent authority12 based on prescribed monetary limits delegated to them.
Audit noticed that four13 test-checked ULBs had split 914 and 515 works into separate
packages so that the estimated cost of the work did not exceed `50 lakh and `10 lakh
respectively (Appendix- 5.1 a&b). Thus the ULBs avoided the sanction of higher
competent authorities. The ULBs replied that the works were split to complete the
works within the stipulated period. Reply was not acceptable as the justification for
splitting the works was not recorded and works were generally completed beyond the
stipulated time. The works were split to avoid sanction from higher authority.
In Nandyal municipality, the work of ‘Rehabilitation and widening of CC road main
gate to cross culvert at vegetable market’ was technically sanctioned (February 2014)
for `10 lakh for 100 mtrs road length. Audit observed that the original road layout map
indicated the road length as 114 mtrs. The work was completed (November 2014)
incurring an expenditure of `10.94 lakh by covering road length of 116.50 mtrs, i.e.,
16.50 mtrs beyond the length of 100 mtrs provided in the estimates. Thus, the
Municipality avoided sanction of the Superintending Engineer by restricting the
technical sanction for road length of 100 mtrs valuing `10 lakh. The ULB replied
(March 2017) that the estimation was prepared for `10 lakh to avoid administrative
delay and the ratification from the higher authorities would be obtained. Thus, the
estimate was under-valued to avoid technical sanction from the higher authorities.
State Government accepted (November 2017) audit observations.
5.1.5.2 Award of works on nomination basis
State Government ordered (February 2014) that for all the works costing `one lakh
and above, e-procurement platform should be adopted to enhance transparency and
bring uniformity. Works on nomination basis16, to private agencies, shall be awarded
only for civic works which need to be carried out on emergency basis, but not for
works of regular nature. Mummidivaram Nagar Panchayat and Guntur Municipal

12
Executive Engineer - for works costing upto `10 lakh , Superintending Engineer-works costing
upto `50 lakh and Chief Engineer/Engineer-in-Chief-works costing above `50 lakh
13
Proddatur, Nandyal, Machilipatnam and Guntur
14
Valued at `8.91 crore
15
Valued at `1.27 crore
16
Nomination means awarding works to contractors without going for tenders

Page 57
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Corporation (GMC) awarded (2016-17) 26 works (`3.20 crore) and 18 works

(`79 lakh) respectively, which were of regular nature, on nomination basis.
State Government replied (November 2017) that works were allotted on nomination
basis to avoid lapse of funds and assured to avoid such entrustment in future.
5.1.5.3 Publishing of tender notices
As per Government orders (July 2003), tender notices with estimated value of more
than `50 lakh shall be published one each in Telugu daily and English daily having
largest circulation at the State level. Mummidivaram Nagar Panchayat had accorded
administrative sanction (January 2016) for 17 road works with an estimated cost of
`1.21 crore under the SCSP grant. In violation of Government Orders, the Municipality
published the tender notice only in the district edition of a local newspaper, which was
not a widely circulated Telugu daily. Audit noticed that 11 out of 17 works, with an
estimated value of `63.03 lakh, were entrusted (June 2016) to a single contractor. The
contract was, however, cancelled (December 2016) as the contractor did not come
forward to commence the works. The Municipality replied (April 2017) that the
newspaper had quoted lesser amount than other newspapers and assured to give
advertisements in largely circulated newspapers.
Thus, the ULB lost offers from competitive bidding/qualified bidders for execution of
work due to lack of wide publicity. The SC habitations were deprived of the intended
infrastructural facilities due to improper action of the ULB.
State Government accepted audit observation and assured (November 2017) that
advertisements would be published in widely circulated newspapers henceforth.
5.1.5.4 Delay in execution of works
1. Delay in concluding agreement: After issue of Letter of Acceptance (LOA) to the
successful bidder, the Agreement is to be concluded within 14/7 days or else the
contract would be cancelled and EMD would be forfeited. Audit noticed that Tenali
and Bhimavaram ULBs concluded five agreements with abnormal delay of 4-27
months from the date of issue of LOA (Appendix- 5.2). ULBs replied
(April-May 2017) that works were located in newly developed areas and boundaries
of the road were not finalized by Town planning wing of ULB. Further, ULBs
stated that contractors did not come forward. Thus, the projects had been delayed,
causing inconvenience to the public due to delay in concluding agreements within
14/7 days.
State Government attributed (November 2017) delay to non-removal of
encroachments and site disputes.
2. Delay in completion of works: The contractors have to complete the work within
the time stipulated in the agreement conditions. As per para 154 of APPWD Code,

Page 58
 Chapter V – Compliance Audit Paragraphs

delay, if any, has to be condoned by way of granting Extension of Time (EOT) by

the concerned competent authority. Liquidated damages have to be levied as per
the conditions of Agreement, if the delay is on the part of the contractor. Audit
observed delays in completion of 30 works in six test-checked ULBs, for which
EOT was not granted (Appendix- 5.3). Audit could not assess liquidated damages
leviable in the absence of records to show the delays attributable to the
contractor/department. Three17 test-checked ULBs attributed the delay to shortage
of sand and encroachments.
In Guntur Municipal Corporation (GMC), for 31 road works (Appendix- 5.4)
though agreements were concluded with the contractors during 2014-17, none of
the works were commenced as of June 2017.
Thus, delays in executing the work deprived the habitations of connectivity.
State Government accepted and replied (November 2017) that in Guntur Municipal
Corporation, 6 out of 31 works were completed and balance works were stopped as
UGD works were under execution. In other six ULBs, the delay occurred due to
shortage of sand and removal of encroachments.
5.1.5.5 Poor planning
Guntur Municipal Corporation (GMC) proposed (May 2016) “Construction of 36
metres bridge at Ankireddypalem”, to provide connectivity between the SC colony
and burial ground in Ankireddypalem area. The work was awarded (October 2016) to
a contractor for `38.05 lakh and the same was completed in March 2017. The total
value of work done as per final bill (March 2017) was `38.15 lakh.

Bridge constructed at Ankireddypalem (Guntur district) without approach roads.

Audit noticed that provision was not made for laying approach road connecting the
newly constructed bridge in the estimate. A physical verification of work site also

17
Adoni, Proddatur and Tiruvuru

Page 59
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

confirmed that there was no approach road to the bridge. As such, people of the
habitation were unable to utilize the bridge. GMC replied (June 2017) that due to
insufficient funds, approach road was not proposed in the estimate. Thus, failure of
GMC to provide approach road indicated defective planning and resulted in unfruitful
expenditure of `38.15 lakh as the bridge constructed was not serving the intended
purpose.
State Government replied (November 2017) that estimates were submitted
subsequently for permanent approach roads to the bridge, which were pending
approval.
5.1.5.6 Asset inventory
As per provision in the Manual18, the Engineering section of the Municipality is
responsible to make an inventory of all assets owned/held by a municipality. The
inventory also includes various types of roads within the municipality. None of the
test-checked ULBs maintained Asset register in respect of road works. Since asset
register facilitates the ULBs to (i) plan properly for new roads, (ii) prepare a
maintenance schedule for existing roads (iii) detect duplication of road works, etc.,
audit could not vouchsafe the justification on expenditure incurred towards various road
works.
State Government replied (November 2017) that Government Project Monitoring
System (GPMS) has been introduced (November 2017) in MA & UD department for
capturing all assets. However, necessary evidence in support of maintaining assets
inventory in GPMS mode was not furnished to audit.
5.1.5.7 Non-collection of road cutting charges
Road cutting and restoration charges are to be levied and collected from service
providers for laying of optical fibre cable duly notifying rates per running meter as per
Government Orders (September 2014). Further, Commissioner and Director,
Municipal Administration had instructed (May 2012), to monitor the work of laying
cables and supervise the restoration work as per specifications. In such cases
permission will come into force only after payment of charges and subject to fulfilment
of the conditions.
In Nandyal municipality, one agency19 sought permission for laying optical fibre cable
to an extent of 17,017 meters. ULB accorded permission for laying 13,260 meters only
and collected (June 2014) road cutting and restoration charges amounting to
`2.20 crore. Municipal Commissioner found (August 2015) that the agency had dug

18
Andhra Pradesh Municipal Asset Management Manual (2008)
19
M/s. Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited (RJIL), Hyderabad

Page 60
 Chapter V – Compliance Audit Paragraphs

excess length of road to an extent of 5,750 meters and issued notices to the agency for
remitting `94.61 lakh to ULB. However, the agency had not remitted the amount.
State Government assured (November 2017) that the amount would be collected from
the agency at the earliest.
In three other ULBs (Bhimavaram, Narasapur and Guntur), Audit noticed that
certificate in support of satisfactory completion of laying of optical fibre cable was not
on record. Details of supervision of road cutting and restoration as per specifications
by the service providers were also not recorded.
State Government replied (November 2017) that certificate in support of satisfactory
completion of the work would be recorded henceforth.
Thus, ULBs failed to collect necessary charges prior to according permission and also
failed to effectively supervise the works.
5.1.5.8 Pedestrian facilities
Indian Road Congress20 stipulates that pedestrian facilities should be planned in an
integrated manner to ensure a safe and continuous pedestrian flow. Sidewalks/footpaths
on either side of the road and pedestrian crossings should be provided in every ULB to
reduce pedestrian conflict with vehicular traffic to the minimum. However, none of the
test-checked ULBs included pedestrian facilities in the estimates and, therefore, the
facilities were not provided. Absence of provision of pedestrian facilities would
jeopardize pedestrian safety.
State Government agreed (November 2017) with audit comment about lack of provision
for pedestrian facility and assured that necessary instructions would be issued to all the
ULBs to provide the same wherever it would be feasible and necessary.
5.1.5.9 Non-conducting of monthly review meetings
As per the manual21, Municipal Commissioners have to conduct review meetings once
in a month and issue minutes of the review meeting and ensure follow up action on the
said minutes. However, no review meetings were held in any of the test-checked ULBs.
Thus, the purpose of effective monitoring was not achieved.
State Government accepted (November 2017) audit observation and assured that
necessary instructions would be issued to all the ULBs for conducting monthly review
meetings.

20
IRC103-1988
21
Manual of Roles and Responsibilities of various functionaries in Urban Local Bodies in Andhra
Pradesh

Page 61
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

5.1.5.10 Third Party Quality Control (TPQC)

As per the Government Orders (October 2004), TPQC is mandatory for works costing
`one lakh and above. The objective of TPQC is to ensure/improve the quality of the
executed works. Payments should be made only after third party inspection is done and
works are found satisfactory as per the prescribed standards. All the test-checked ULBs
entrusted the TPQC works to Third Party Quality agencies. Audit observed that except
in Guntur and Bhimavaram ULBs, the TPQCs did not make adverse remarks on the
quality of the works.
Tiruvuru Nagar Panchayat accorded administrative sanction for the work of ‘providing
CC road to MDO Office road to SR towers in 8th ward’. The ULB entered into
agreement on 30 September 2016 and work order was issued on the same day. TPQC
report was, however, issued on 26 September 2016. Similarly, TPQC report for another
work22 was given in the month of September 2016 before the commencement
(October 2016) of work by the contractor.
Submission of TPQC report even before commencement of work was not proper and it
reduced the whole exercise to a farce.
State Government assured (November 2017) that instructions would be given to the
concerned officials for ensuring the genuineness of the TPQC reports before passing
the bills.

5.1.6 Conclusion
Funds available under Scheduled Castes Sub-Plan (SCSP) and 14th Finance
Commission grants were not effectively utilised. The objective of providing
infrastructure facilities in the ULBs was not achieved despite availability of funds.
Works were split to avoid technical sanction from the higher authorities. Works were
allotted on nomination basis to avoid lapse of funds. Delay in execution and completion
of works deprived the habitations of road connectivity. There was no provision of
pedestrian facilities in the estimates. There was no mechanism of maintenance of Asset
inventory to plan for new road works and maintenance schedule. Collection of
necessary charges prior to according permissions was not efficient. Supervision of the
road works was not effective.

22
Providing CC road from Gunjapalli Venkateswara Rao house to Manne Satyam house in 9th ward

Page 62
 Chapter V – Compliance Audit Paragraphs

5.2 Wasteful expenditure of `2.35 crore

Failure of Pulivendula Municipality to ensure source of continuous water supply

to the swimming pool resulted in wasteful expenditure of `2.35 crore

The Council of Pulivendula Municipality had passed (August 2008) resolution for the
construction of Recreation and Remunerative Complex23 in the premises of Missamma
Bungalow24 with an estimated cost of `2.24 crore. The scope of this work included the
construction of swimming pool. The work was awarded (January 2009) to a private
contractor with stipulation to complete the work in nine months. Subsequently, State
Government accorded (March 2009) administrative sanction for taking up the work.
Municipality planned Summer Storage (SS) Tank under Pulivendula Branch Canal as
source of water for supplying clear water to operate swimming pool.
During scrutiny of the records (November 2016) of the Pulivendula Municipality, audit
observed that the construction of swimming pool was completed in May 2011 at an
expenditure of `2.35 crore25. After lapse of six months from the date of completion of
the work, the swimming pool was leased out (November 2011) at a monthly rent of
`27,000. As per the lease agreement26, the municipality had to supply clear water to
the swimming pool and the contractor had to maintain the swimming pool neat and
clean on daily basis. However, the contractor stopped (August 2012) operating the
swimming pool as municipality had not provided regular water supply since
March 2012. The municipality issued (November 2012) notice to the agency
demanding payment of monthly rents due from September 2012. The contractor
requested (October 2013) the Municipal Commissioner for payment of compensation
for the loss sustained by him as he could not operate swimming pool without supply of
water from municipality. The contractor approached the Honourable District Court,
Kadapa in December 2014 for the loss suffered by him. The case was decided
(March 2015) ex-parte against the Municipality with costs27 to the contractor.
In response to Audit Enquiry (November 2016), the Municipal Commissioner replied
that the source of water was planned to be drawn from SS tank. Water could not be
provided to the swimming pool due to severe drought condition from 2011 onwards.
Efforts were made to supply water by digging of bore wells in the premises of
swimming pool. The idea was shelved due to less yield. The municipality further stated

23
Swimming pool and Shopping complex
24
The bungalow belongs to Pulivendula Municipality
25
`1.91 crore for construction of swimming pool plus `0.44 crore for erection of pressure sand filters
with pump sets
26
Clause 17 and 18 of agreement dated 18-11-2011
27
A sum of `5.68 lakh towards security deposit and salaries of watchman, `10 lakh towards
compensation and `0.36 lakh towards cost of suit

Page 63
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

that it did not represent its case as it was sure that water could not be provided for
swimming pool even if court gave directions for the same.
Thus, Pulivendula Municipality failed to adhere to lease agreement condition of
providing continuous clear water supply. This had resulted in the swimming pool
remaining inoperative for a period of five years, besides causing wasteful expenditure
of `2.35 crore on construction.
State Government accepted (November 2017) that due to severe drought conditions,
the Municipality could not supply water to swimming pool and that the Municipality
was planning to drill two bore wells to supply water to swimming pool exclusively to
put the same into use.
5.3 Avoidable cost overrun and infructuous expenditure

Delay in deciding the design and technology of STP resulted in cost overrun of
`38.77 crore besides infructuous expenditure of `66.48 lakh and delay of nine
years

Government of Andhra Pradesh (MA & UD)28 had accorded (February 2007)
administrative sanction for the project ‘Narsaraopet Sewerage Scheme under
UIDSSMT29’ for `30.99 crore. The work was awarded (August 2007) to Contractor
‘A’ for `25.88 crore with a stipulation to complete within 24 months. The scheme
included laying of all sewer lines, construction of manholes, road restoration and
construction of Sewerage Treatment Plant (STP) with Waste Stabilization Pond
(WSP)30 technology.
Audit scrutiny (February 2016 and June 2017) of the records of Narasaraopet
Municipality showed that Municipality acquired (May2009) land admeasuring
42.42 acres for construction of STP. Department appointed consultancy reported
(December 2009) that soil of the acquired land was not suitable for WSP technology
and suggested alternate technology31. Based on the department Consultancy report,
Municipality requested (June 2010) the Government to accord sanction for revised
estimate. However, the Government appointed (October 2010) a committee for
finalisation of method of technology. The committee had instructed (May 2011) the
Municipality to adopt the traditional WSP technology. Accordingly, Municipality gave
clearance to the contractor for execution of work of STP in May 2011. However, the
contractor, after completing all works except STP, requested (June 2011) to close the
contract due to delay in finalisation of technology and abnormal increase in rates. State

28
Municipal Administration and Urban Development
29
Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for Small and Medium Towns (UIDSSMT)
30
WSP is a shallow man made basin into which waste water flows and from which after retention time
of several days a well-treated effluent is discharged
31
Alternate technology included SBR (Sequencing Batch Reactor)

Page 64
 Chapter V – Compliance Audit Paragraphs

Government permitted (January 2013) to close the contract and also permitted to call
fresh tenders for STP with same technology. Accordingly, the contract was closed in
January 2013. Municipality revised (May 2013) the project cost from `30.99 crore to
`44.01 crore. ENC (PH) awarded (August 2013) the balance work of construction of
STP to Contractor ‘B’ for `8.63 crore with stipulation to complete the work in
12 months. Contractor ‘B’ executed only earthwork valuing `66.48 lakh and
discontinued the work stating that gravel quarries were not available in and around
Narasaraopet. Municipality closed (May 2015) the contract without STP being
constructed as the contractor had not resumed the work even after expiry of extension
of time.
Later, the Municipality changed (June 2015) the design of the STP from originally
proposed WSP technology to SBR (Sequencing Batch Reactor)32 technology.
Accordingly the project cost was revised (December 2015) from `44.01 crore to
`69.76 crore. ENC/PH in September 2016 awarded the work of construction of STP to
Contractor ‘C’ for `34.65 crore with stipulation to complete in 24 months. The work
was in progress as of June 2017.
State Government accepted (November 2017) the delay in deciding the technology for
STP and stated that requirement of more land was saved. The reply is not acceptable
as the Department appointed consultancy recommended SBR technology in
December 2009 itself. Timely decision on technology was not taken.
Thus, awarding the first contract without acquisition of suitable land and delay in
deciding the design and technology of STP resulted in cost overrun of `38.7733 crore.
Further, there was an infructuous expenditure of `66.48 lakh and delay of nine years.
The intended users continue to be deprived of the facility which should have been
ideally available to them by August 2009.
5.4 Avoidable expenditure of `71.99 lakh

Failure of the Municipality to register with the Central Excise and Service Tax
Department in time and to collect Service Tax from the tenants resulted in
avoidable expenditure of `71.99 lakh

Section 69(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 provides that it is mandatory for every person
liable to pay service tax to get registered with department of Central Excise and Service
Tax. Registration has to be done within a period of 30 days34. Section 68 (1) of the Act

32
SBR technology provides highest treatment efficiency possible in a single reactor within which all
biological treatment steps take place sequentially
Whereas WSP is a shallow man made basin into which waste water flows and from which after
retention time of several days a well-treated effluent is discharged. WSP comprise a series of ponds
requiring large extent of land.
33
`69.76 crore minus `30.99 crore
34
Service tax procedures-section 69 of the Finance Act

Page 65
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

provides that every person providing taxable service to any person shall pay service tax.
Renting of immovable property was brought under service tax net with effect from
1 June 200735. The term ‘renting of immovable property’ includes renting, leasing or
other similar arrangements of immovable property for use in the course or furtherance
of business or commerce36.
Scrutiny of records of Tuni Municipality (February 2017) showed that the Municipality
had been letting out its own shops on rental basis. However, the Municipality neither
registered with the Superintendent of Central Excise and Service Tax nor discharged
its service tax liability. Municipality stated that the registration with the Central Excise
department was taken belatedly (October 2014) after getting notice (January 2011) from
the said department. Due to delay in obtaining registration, the Assistant Commissioner
of Service Tax, Kakinada recovered (February 2015) an amount of `8.16 lakh37 after
issuing notice under Section 87 of the Finance Act.
Municipality was authorised to alter the conditions of agreement38 with tenants.
However, Municipality served (August 2014) only notices to tenants. It failed to collect
the Service Tax including the arrears stating that the tenants were reluctant to pay
service tax. After receiving the notices from the Central Excise department, the
Municipality paid an amount of `63.83 lakh towards service tax for the period from
June 2007 to March 2015 from its General Fund (Appendix- 5.5). Service tax was
recovered from the tenants from April 2015 only.
Thus, failure of the Municipality to register with the department concerned in time and
also its failure to collect service tax from the tenants resulted in avoidable expenditure
of `71.99 lakh39.
State Government accepted and assured (November 2017) that the expenditure incurred
by the Municipality from its General Fund would be recovered from the tenants.
5.5 Infructuous expenditure of `29.91 crore

Failure of the department to ensure adoption of approved designs by the

contractor resulted in infructuous expenditure of `29.91 crore

Government of Andhra Pradesh had accorded (January 2008) administrative sanction

for the project - ‘Water Supply Scheme under UIDSSMT40 in Piduguralla Municipality’
for `36.07 crore. Engineer-in-Chief (PH) accorded technical sanction in August 2008.
The work included investigation, survey, design, preparation and execution of

35
Inserted (w.e.f 01.06.2007) by section 135 of the Finance Act
36
As per section 65 (90a) of the Finance Act, as amended
37
`3.76 lakh towards penalty and `4.40 lakh towards interest
38
Gazette no. 521(dated 08th November 2006) of Tuni Municipality
39
`63.83 lakh and `8.16 lakh
40
Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for Small & Medium Town (UIDSSMT)

Page 66
 Chapter V – Compliance Audit Paragraphs

Piduguralla Water Supply Scheme. It was entrusted to a contract agency in

December 2008 for `37.35 crore with a stipulation to complete the work in 15 months
(i.e. by March 2010). Krishna River at Govindapuram was proposed as source for
drawal of water for the scheme. According to agreement the contractor should submit
the detailed designs after duly conducting survey. The department should approve the
design for all the components. Public Health Division, Narasaraopet was the executing
agency on behalf of Piduguralla Municipality for execution of Water Supply Scheme.
Audit scrutiny (April 2016 and May 2017) of the work records in Public Health
Division, Narasaraopet showed that the work was not completed as on date. An amount
of `29.91 crore was paid to the contractor for the work executed as of May 2017.
Agreement conditions stipulated that field engineers should check the measurements of
the work done as per codal provisions and rules in vogue. The Engineer-in-charge shall
recommend for release of payment duly considering the department quality control
reports. However, it was only during the trial run (September 2014) that the Division
noticed and reported that raft top level of the intake well41 was constructed at
+42.95 mtr as against the approved top level of +39.00 mtr. As a result water could not
enter into intake well, even though sufficient water was available in Krishna River. The
same position was confirmed by the Superintending Engineer, Public Health Quality
Control Circle during his inspection (November 2014) of the site. As per agreement
conditions, the agency was responsible to execute the scheme as per the approved
designs. However, the agency did not rectify the defects though it had the responsibility
to maintain the scheme for the defect liability period of 24 months.
Department closed the contract42 and submitted (May 2015) proposal to Government
for `43.03 crore (`6.96 crore above the original sanction) for which sanction was
awaited (May 2017). The proposals again included construction of intake well cum
pump house and other balance works.
The implementing agency43 and the State Government accepted (April 2016 and
November 2017 respectively) the fact that the discrepancy in the level of intake well
was noticed during the trial run. The water could not enter into intake well due to faulty
construction. Government stated that as the agency did not come forward to rectify the
defects, construction of intake well with other ancillary works was proposed. It was
assured that recoveries would be made from the contractor for the components of faulty
execution. Necessary steps would be taken for the optimum use of the scheme.

41
The minimum level where water enter into the intake well
42
Under Clause 61 of Andhra Pradesh Standard Specifications (APSS) which provides for termination
of the contract if the Contractor stops work for 28 days and the stoppage has not been authorised by
the Engineer-in-Chief
43
Public Health Division, Narasaraopet

Page 67
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Thus, failure of the department to arrange timely supervision of the work at appropriate
stages to ensure proper adoption of approved designs resulted in infructuous
expenditure of `29.91 crore. Department needs to fix responsibility on the officials
responsible for faulty execution of the work which resulted in infructuous expenditure.
Further, the project also could not be commissioned even after lapse of nine years of
awarding of the work.
5.6 Unfruitful expenditure of `1.97 crore

Failure of Pulivendula municipality to install water meters in households

resulted in unfruitful expenditure of `1.97 crore. The objective of minimizing
wastage and economic pricing of water was not achieved.

State Government had accorded (September 2007) sanction for the work ‘Water Supply
distribution network in the entire area of Pulivendula municipality’ for `11 crore. The
estimate included provision towards supply and fixing of water meters (15,000) for
`2.21 crore to minimise wastage of water and to maintain economic pricing of water.

Scrutiny of records of the Pulivendula Municipality (November 2016) revealed that

contract was awarded (November 2007) to an agency by the Engineer-in-Chief (Public
Health). Supply and fixing of water meters for all House Service Connections was
included in the work estimate. During the execution of work, the contractor supplied
(August 2008) 15,000 water meters for the purpose of House Service Connections.
Public Health Division, Kadapa44 paid (June 2009) an amount of `1.97 crore to the
agency for supply of water meters. However, Public Health Division failed to ensure
that the contractor installed the same as per agreement condition. Hence, it handed over
(July 2013) the entire stock of water meters to Pulivendula municipality. Water meters
were lying in stock for more than eight years as of March 2017. The municipality
incurred (2013-17) O&M charges of `2.82 crore towards cost of water supply. The
municipality, however, collected only `1.83 crore during the period towards water
charges from consumers at a uniform rate45. The deficit in collection worked out to
`0.99 crore.

Pulivendula municipality attributed (March 2017) failure to fix water meters in the
households to public not coming forward for fixing water meters. However, the
municipality did not initiate action to create public awareness. Municipality further
stated that the gap between the revenue realization and O&M expenditure was due to
water meters not being installed and drought conditions in the last five years.
Thus, failure of Pulivendula municipality to install water meters in households resulted
in unfruitful expenditure of `1.97 crore besides the objective of minimizing wastage of

44
Public Health Division, Kadapa was the executing agency on behalf of Pulivendula Municipality
45
`100 per month per consumer

Page 68
 Chapter V – Compliance Audit Paragraphs

water not being achieved. Economic pricing of water was also not achieved since O&M
expenditure exceeded (2013-17) cost of water supply by C0.99 crore.
State Government replied (November 2017) that necessary steps would be taken to
install the water meters at the earliest.

Hyderabad (L.TOCHHAWNG)
The Principal Accountant General (Audit)
Andhra Pradesh

Countersigned

New Delhi (RAJIV MEHRISHI)

The Comptroller and Auditor General of India

ƒ‰‡͸ͻ
 Appendices

Pages 71- 101

 Appendices

Appendix- 1.1

(Reference to Paragraph 1.3, Page No. 2)

Statement showing district-wise and department-wise devolution of funds to PRIs

during 2016-17
` in crore)
(`
Name of the District Name of the departments
Animal BC Fisheries Total
Husbandry Welfare

Release 0.00 0.03 5.90 5.93

Anantapuramu
Expenditure 0.00 0.05 0.36 0.41
Release 0.00 0.00 4.76 4.76
Chittoor
Expenditure 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.37
Release 0.00 0.04 12.26 12.30
East Godavari
Expenditure 0.00 0.12 3.34 3.46
Release 0.00 0.00 23.94 23.94
Guntur
Expenditure 0.00 0.00 5.88 5.88
Release 5.93 0.00 13.11 19.04
Krishna
Expenditure 6.35 0.00 12.36 18.7
Release 0.00 0.02 4.77 4.78
Kurnool
Expenditure 0.01 0.02 0.85 0.88
Release 9.98 0.00 0.14 10.13
SPSR Nellore
Expenditure 9.62 0.00 0.14 9.76
Release 0.00 0.00 2.59 2.59
Prakasam
Expenditure 0.05 0.00 0.21 0.26
Release 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.48
Visakhapatnam
Expenditure 10.13 0.00 1.02 11.15
Release 0.23 0.03 7.07 7.32
West Godavari
Expenditure 0.23 0.00 1.64 1.86
Release 0.00 0.00 4.51 4.51
YSR
Expenditure 0.00 0.00 0.97 0.97
Release 16.62 0.12 79.05 95.78
Total
Expenditure 26.39 0.19 27.14 53.70
Source: Information furnished by CPR & RD, Andhra Pradesh (November 2017)
Note: Where expenditure exceeded the releases is due to addition of opening balance

Page 71
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Appendix- 2.1
(Reference to Paragraph No.2.1.4.1, Page No.14)
Statement showing the assets held by Zilla Praja Parishad
Sl. No. District Extent of land
(in Acres)
1 Anantapuramu 1,727.08
2 Chittoor 1,998.02
3 East Godavari 966.06
4 Guntur 2,330.66
5 SPSR Nellore 1,023.87
6 Srikakulam 467.04
7 Visakhapatnam 140.31
Total 8,653.04

Appendix- 2.2
(Reference to Paragraph No.2.1.4.1, Page No.14)
Statement showing the assets held by Mandal Praja Parishad
Sl. No. District Mandal Extent of land
(in Acres)
1 Bukkapatnam 3.90
2 Nallacheruvu 127.02
3 Anantapuramu Ramagiri 17.19
4 Singanamala 15.04
5 Yadiki 6.81
6 Kalakada 28.51
7 Punganur 17.94
8 Chittoor Puttur 10.89
9 Thavanampalle 8.80
10 Yerpedu 17.75
11 Thondangi 11.60
12 Prathipadu 15.38
13 East Godavari P Gannavaram 14.48
14 Ramachandrapuram 7.21
15 Anaparthi 0.00
16 Atchampeta 14.21
17 Tenali 4.32
18 Guntur Thullur 44.66
19 Pedanadipadu 8.17
20 Nadendla 8.51
21 Bogole 6.40
22 Ozili 25.32
SPSR Nellore
23 Manubolu 36.94
24 Vinjamuru 45.29

Page 72
 Appendices

Sl. No. District Mandal Extent of land

(in Acres)
25 Kovvuru 20.86
26 Polaki 67.07
27 Pathapatnam 5.16
28 Srikakulam Nandigam 5.82
29 Laveru 19.28
30 G Sigadam 10.33
31 Pendurthi 24.82
32 Munagapaka 13.66
33 Visakhapatnam Devarapalli 16.87
34 V Madugula 15.93
35 Nathavaram 9.06
Total 705.20

Appendix- 2.3
(Reference to Paragraph No.2.1.4.1, Page No. 14)
Statement showing the lands held by Gram Panchayats
Sl. District Name of the Gram Panchayat Extent of land
No. (in Acres)
1 A.Narayanapuram 0.98
2 Anantapuramu Rural 0.74
3 Gorantla 6.60
4 Kakkalapalli Colony 1.25
5 Kirikera 5.20
Anantapuramu
6 Kodiginahalli 8.58
7 Lachunapalli 0.02
8 Prasannapalli 4.90
9 Rudrampet 4.86
10 Uravakonda 0.17
11 Avilala NA
12 Chandragiri 1.61
13 Gangavaram 0.09
14 KakularamPalli 0.36
15 Peruru 0.18
Chittoor
16 Setpalli 3.45
17 Thondawada 1.30
18 Thottambedu 0.05
19 Tiruchanur 1.85
20 Vedantapuram 0.02
21 Hukumpeta 4.39
22 Pidimgoyyi 4.05
23 Chakradwarabandam 0.12
24 East Godavari Namavaram NA
25 Palacharla 1.13
26 Rajavolu 58.64
27 Unduru NA

Page 73
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Sl. District Name of the Gram Panchayat Extent of land

No. (in Acres)
28 Atchampeta NA
29 Ramanayyapeta NA
30 Thimmapuram 1.52
31 Chebrole 25.37
32 Edlapadu 11.79
33 Irukupalem 8.94
34 Kattempudi 5.50
35 Kaza 11.76
Guntur
36 Lalpuram 5.22
37 Obulanaidupalem 16.29
38 Perecherla 6.74
39 Vankayalapadu 2.50
40 Vengalayapalem NA
41 Kanupur Bit-II 0.07
42 MadarajuGudur/Kakupalli bit-II 0.02
43 Macherlavaripalem 0.26
44 Musunuruvaripalem NA
45 Varikavipudi 0.03
SPSR Nellore
46 Varigonda NA
47 Thotapalli 77.62
48 Manubolu NA
49 Narikelapalli 3.70
50 Pidathapolur NA
51 Ampolu 14.42
52 Chapuram 1.10
53 Donkalapartha 10.75
54 Kesavaraopeta 36.21
55 Khajipeta 11.05
Srikakulam
56 Mandapalli 7.85
57 Pathapatnam 55.01
58 Patrunivalasa 19.46
59 Singupuram 25.86
60 Thotapalem 11.19
61 Avasomavaram NA
62 Cheemalapalli NA
63 Chippada 14.94
64 Nagavaram NA
65 Nakkapali NA
Visakhapatnam
66 P L Puram NA
67 Payakaraopeta 5.65
68 Ravada NA
69 Tallavalasa 23.05
70 Vellanki 19.76
Total 544.17
NA: Not available with Gram Panchayat

Page 74
 Appendices

Appendix- 2.4
(Reference to Paragraph No.2.1.4.3, Page No. 16)
Statement showing the ZPP land alienated to Government Departments/Government
Organisations

Sl. Name of the Location of the Land Year of Extent of Survey Value
No. ZPP land Alienated to Alienation land Number of land
alienated `
(` in
(in crore)
Acres)
1 East Godavari Raja Nagaram Transport May 2003 5.00 121/1A 2 2.42
village Department
2 Guntur Suryalanka Police 2006 3.03 547/3A5 0.73
(Adivi) village Department
3 Visakhapatnam Juttada Village APTRANSCO December 2011 0.14 31/4A 0.07
4 Guntur Gutur town District Rural September 1992 0.75 49 0.09
Development
Agency
5 Guntur Perecherla Andhra Pradesh February 1975 10.11 380 & 0.04
Village Industrial 381/1B
Infrastructure
Corporation
6 Guntur Mangalagiri Andhra Pradesh May 1968 0.31 273/3 2.55
State Road
Transport
Corporation
7 Visakhapatnam Vemulapudi District December 2015 1.00 -- Not
village Vocational assessed
Educational
Officer
Total 20.34 5.90

Page 75
 Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Appendix- 2.5
(Reference to Paragraph No. 2.1.4.4(i) & 2.1.4.4 (ii), Page No. 17&18)
Statement showing the details of layouts in Gram Panchayats
Sl. No. Name of the Name of the Gram Authorised layouts Unauthorised
District Panchayat layout
No. of Extent No. of Extent
layouts (in Acres) layouts (in Acre)
1 Anantapuramu Anantapuramu Rural 16 41.76 72 441.60
2 A. Narayanapuram 1 20.00 30 329.34
3 Gorantla 0 0.00 39 105.85
4 Kakkalapalli Colony 0 0.00 34 33.29
5 Kirikera 1 4.73 183 800.94
6 Kodiginahalli 0 0.00 36 124.96
7 Lachunapalli 0 0.00 38 138.68
8 Prasannapalli 0 0.00 86 211.56
9 Rudrampet 4 18.03 70 369.54
10 Uravakonda 85 323.87 8 43.81
11 Chittoor Avilala 19 73.73 0 0.00
12 Chandragiri 27 122.06 5 23.20
13 Gangavaram 16 43.32 13 37.06
14 KakularamPalli 0 0.00 33 65.05
15 Peruru 19 88.89 12 20.00
16 Setpalli 35 259.71 30 203.63
17 Thondawada 22 171.23 3 16.75
18 Thottambedu 1 8.54 36 155.41
19 Tiruchanur 43 360.03 19 131.50
20 Vedantapuram 21 176.66 1 1.75
21 East Godavari Atchampeta 38 163.96 6 42.78
22 Chakradwarabandam 23 67.71 6 26.34
23 Hukumpeta 29 200.00 0 0.00
24 Namavaram 46 154.22 2 3.44
25 Palacharla 104 575.06 1 2.16
26 Pidimgoyyi 69 385.89 8 23.24
27 Rajavolu 26 88.15 0 0.00
28 Ramanayyapeta 89 657.30 9 16.72
29 Thimmapuram 132 659.86 17 40.24
30 Unduru 29 206.44 0 0.00
31 Guntur Chebrole 5 52.25 24 67.26
32 Edlapadu 3 29.24 4 4.32
33 Irukupalem 0 0.00 13 18.92
34 Kattempudi 0 0.00 33 46.21
35 Kaza 24 290.62 3 9.52
36 Lalpuram 3 22.70 15 13.73
37 Obulanaidupalem 13 116.25 0 0.00
38 Perecherla 2 6.57 25 90.54
39 Vankayalapadu 11 65.92 11 58.48
40 Vengalayapalem 11 55.11 22 76.21

Page 76
 Appendices

Sl. No. Name of the Name of the Gram Authorised layouts Unauthorised
District Panchayat layout
No. of Extent No. of Extent
layouts (in Acres) layouts (in Acre)
41 SPSR Nellore Kanupur Bit-II 0 0.00 11 26.27
42 Macherlavaripalem 7 14.97 0 0.00
43 Madaraju Gudur/ 0 0.00 13 30.39
Kakupalli bit-II
44 Manubolu 7 30.15 5 61.42
45 Musunuruvaripalem 0 0.00 0 0.00
46 Narikelapalli 7 17.22 0 0.00
47 Pidathapolur 9 19.13 0 0.00
48 Thotapalli 0 0.00 11 26.58
49 Varigonda 43 252.52 2 10.89
50 Varikavipudi 15 35.05 0 0.00
51 Srikakulam Ampolu 0 0.00 8 30.27
52 Chapuram 4 14.15 29 75.03
53 Donkalapartha 0 0.00 7 11.66
54 Kesavaraopeta 0 0.00 7 32.06
55 Khajipeta 5 10.48 32 87.34
56 Mandapalli 0 0.00 8 39.97
57 Pathapatnam 0 0.00 16 49.87
58 Patrunivalasa 2 7.89 22 71.74
59 Singupuram 3 57.68 13 120.07
60 Thotapalem 0 0.00 16 83.27
61 Visakhapatnam Avasomavaram 20 75.37 0 0.00
62 Cheemalapalli 15 56.53 7 39.62
63 Chippada 17 69.04 0 0.00
64 Nagavaram 9 59.48 11 68.41
65 Nakkapali 3 22.43 12 24.51
66 P. L. Puram 0 0.00 13 35.31
67 Payakaraopeta 0 0.00 51 241.68
68 Ravada 16 294.06 0 0.00
69 Tallavalasa 26 202.54 0 0.00
70 Vellanki 19 151.12 0 0.00
Total 1,194 6,899.62 1,241 4,960.39

Page 77
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Appendix- 2.6
(Reference to Paragraph No.2.2, Page No. 25)
Statement showing details of Zilla Parishad wise late payment charges.
(` in lakh)
S. No Name of Zilla Parishad Period Amount

1 Anantapur (RWS&S division, Penukonda) 2011- 2017 4.54

2 Vijayawada
RWS&S division, Vijayawada 2011- 2014 4.80
RWS&S division, Gudivada 2011- 2014 1.80
3 Kakinada 2015- 2016 37.71
4 Srikakulam 2011- 2014 12.63
5 Guntur
RWS&S division, Narasaraopet 2016- 2017 4.29
Total 65.77

Page 78
 Appendices

Appendix- 4.1
(Reference to Paragraph No. 4.4, Page no. 39)
Statement showing the details of year-wise budget estimates and actual receipt/expenditure
(` in crore)

Budget head 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Budget Receip Short(-) Budget Receip Short(-) Budget Receip Short(-) Budget Receip Short(-) Budget Receip Short(-)
Estima t/Expe /Excess Estima t/Expe /Excess Estima t/Expe /Excess Estima t/Expe /Excess Estima t/Expe /Excess
tes nditure (percent tes nditure (percent tes nditure (percent tes nditure (percent tes nditure (percent
age) age) age) age) age)
Receipts

Property Tax 25.41 21.35 (-)4.06 31.26 25.44 (-) 5.82 30.96 29.80 (-)1.16 38.33 33.63 (-) 4.70 42.17 36.10 (-) 6.07
(15.97) (18.61) (3.75) (12.27) (14.39)
Trade license fee 0.90 1.80 (+) 0.90 1.28 1.09 (-) 0.19 1.40 1.78 (+) 0.38 1.90 0.87 (-) 1.03 1.50 0.61 (-) 0.89
(100) (14.84) (27.14) (54.21) (59.33)

Building permission fee 1.51 3.60 (+) 2.09 5.05 2.50 (+) 2.55 6.31 2.36 (-) 3.95 14.47 0.60 (-) 13.87 7.45 0.07 (-) 7.38
(138) 50.49 (62.59) (95.85) (99.06)

Rents from shopping 0.85 0.91 (+) 0.06 1.40 1.02 (-) 0.38 1.20 1.20 0.00 1.50 1.30 (-) 0.20 1.70 1.19 (-) 0.51
complexes (7.05) (27.14) (100) (13.33) (30)

Total 28.67 27.66 38.99 30.05 39.87 35.14 56.2 36.4 52.82 37.97
Expenditure

Street lighting 3.16 1.96 (-)1.20 5.15 4.87 (-)0.28 11.25 6.25 (-)5.00 13.15 4.90 (-)8.25 6.07 0.00 (-) 6.07
(37.97) (5.43) (44.44) (62.73) (100)

Drainage System 2.00 1.40 (-)0.60 4.93 6.08 (+)1.15 4.80 6.35 (+)1.55 7.82 1.21 (-)6.61 8.69 8.48 (-) 0.21
(30.00) (23.32) (32.29) (84.52) (2.41)
Total 5.16 3.36 10.08 10.95 16.05 12.60 20.97 6.11 14.76 8.48
Source: Budget Estimates and DCB

Page 79
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Appendix- 4.2
(Reference to Paragraph No 4.5.1.2, Page no. 40)
Statement showing the details of cases of delay in bringing the Properties into Property
Tax net after completion of constructions

(Amount in `)
S. PT Assessment To be effected Actually PT per Delay in Total
No. No. from Effected from half year bringing to
tax net
(no. of half
years)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7(5*6)
1. 1012044051 2010-11 2012-13 16,775 4 67,100
(1sthalf year) (1st half year)
2. 1012044886 2016-17 2016-17 22,886 1 22,886
(1st half year) (2ndhalf year)
3. 1012044511 2011-12 2012-13 12,755 2 25,510
(2nd half year) (2ndhalf year)
4. 1012043943 2010-11 2012-13 11,256 4 45,024
(1st half year) (1st half year)
5. 1012062709 2013-14 2014-15 11,965 2 23,930
(2nd half year) (2ndhalf year)
6. 1012044713 2012-13 2013-14 51,610 2 1,03,220
(1st half year) (1st half year)
7. 1012062219 2013-14 2014-15 39,799 2 79,598
(1st half year) (1st half year)
8. 1012044901 2012-13 2013-14 73,584 2 1,47,168
(1st half year) (1st half year)
9. 1012063666 2014-15 2015-16 7,121 2 14,242
(1st half year) (1st half year)
10. 1012044926 2012-13 2013-14 1,53,351 2 3,06,702
(1st half year) (1st half year)
11. 1012055029 2013-14 2014-15 12,806 2 25,612
(1st half year) (1st half year)
12. 1012063581 2014-15 2015-16 10,648 2 21,296
(1st half year) (1st half year)
13. 1012063311 2014-15 2015-16 41,813 2 83,626
(1st half year) (1st half year)
14. 1012063584 2014-15 2015-16 10,522 2 21,044
(1st half year) (1st half year)
15. 1012043840 2011-12 2012-13 30,929 2 61,858
(1st half year) (1st half year)
16. 1012045680 2013-14 2014-15 32,167 2 64,334
(1st half year) (1st half year)
17. 1012064297 2014-15 2015-16 18,251 2 36,502
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
18. 1012049678 2013-14 2014-15 8,576 2 17,152
(1st half year) (1st half year)
19. 1012044912 2012-13 2013-14 32,710 2 65,420
(1st half year) (1st half year)

Page 80
 Appendices

S. PT Assessment To be effected Actually PT per Delay in Total

No. No. from Effected from half year bringing to
tax net
(no. of half
years)
20. 1012063585 2014-15 2015-16 89,748 2 1,79,496
(1st half year) (1st half year)
21. 1012044833 2012-13 2013-14 76,226 2 1,52,452
(1st half year) (1st half year)
22. 1012056569 2013-14 2014-15 7,731 2 15,462
(1st half year) (1st half year)
23. 1012046182 2013-14 2014-15 12,860 2 25,720
(1st half year) (1st half year)
24. 1012063243 2014-15 2015-16 52,247 2 1,04,494
(1st half year) (1st half year)
25. 1012062513 2013-14 2014-15 75,238 2 1,50,476
(2nd half year) (2ndhalf year)
26. 1012064165 2014-15 2015-16 22,072 2 44,144
(2ndhalf year) (2nd half year)
27. 1012063590 2014-15 2015-16 7,642 2 15,284
(1st half year) (1st half year)
28. 1012058503 2013-14 2014-15 21,365 2 42,730
(1st half year) (1st half year)
29. 1012062510 2013-14 2014-15 6,910 2 13,820
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
30. 1012063594 2014-15 2015-16 83,194 2 1,66,388
(1st half year) (1st half year)
31. 1012044203 2011-12 2012-13 14,416 2 28,832
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
32. 1012063359 2014-15 2015-16 7,689 2 15,378
(1st half year) (1st half year)
33. 1012045678 2013-14 2014-15 7,939 2 15,878
(1st half year) (1st half year)
34. 1012063291 2014-15 2015-16 69,404 2 1,38,808
(1st half year) (1st half year)
35. 1012044804 2012-13 2013-14 25,301 2 50,602
(1st half year) (1st half year)
36. 1012062224 2013-14 2014-15 11,031 2 22,062
(1st half year) (1st half year)
37. 1012044418 2011-12 2012-13 11,929 2 23,858
(1st half year) (1st half year)
38. 1012043629 2011-12 2012-13 98,941 2 1,97,882
(1st half year) (1st half year)
39. 1012063294 2014-15 2015-16 11,342 2 22,684
(1st half year) (1st half year)
40. 1012063293 2014-15 2015-16 11,342 2 22,684
(1st half year) (1st half year)
41. 1012044981 2012-13 2013-14 38,747 2 77,494
(1st half year) (1st half year)
42. 1012045702 2013-14 2014-15 10,356 2 20,712
(1st half year) (1st half year)
43. 1012045704 2013-14 2014-15 14,709 2 29,418
(1st half year) (1st half year)
44. 1012044277 2014-15 2016-17 45,931 4 1,83,724
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)

Page 81
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

S. PT Assessment To be effected Actually PT per Delay in Total

No. No. from Effected from half year bringing to
tax net
(no. of half
years)
45. 1012045754 2013-14 2014-15 26,192 2 52,384
(1st half year) (1st half year)
46. 1012045979 2013-14 2014-15 33,279 2 66,558
(1st half year) (1st half year)
47. 1012063371 2014-15 2015-16 19,052 2 38,104
(1st half year) (1st half year)
48. 1012063615 2014-15 2015-16 14,320 2 28,640
(1st half year) (1st half year)
49. 1012044199 2011-12 2012-13 9,734 2 19,468
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
50. 1012057922 2013-14 2014-15 8,643 2 17,286
(1st half year) (1st half year)
51. 1012046198 2013-14 2014-15 6,241 2 12,482
(1st half year) (1st half year)
52. 1012045707 2013-14 2014-15 8,415 2 16,830
(1st half year) (1st half year)
53. 1012044991 2012-13 2013-14 47,014 2 94,028
(1st half year) (1st half year)
54. 1012044800 2012-13 2013-14 14,445 2 28,890
(1st half year) (1st half year)
55. 1012063810 2014-15 2015-16 28,654 2 57,308
(1st half year) (1st half year)
56. 1012063809 2014-15 2015-16 1,19,850 2 2,39,700
(1st half year) (1st half year)
57. 1012062645 2013-14 2014-15 71,783 2 1,43,566
(2ndhalf year) (2nd half year)
58. 1012044998 2012-13 2013-14 2,36,449 2 4,27,898
(1st half year) (1st half year)
59. 1012044359 2011-12 2012-13 1,05,484 2 2,10,968
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
60. 1012063654 2014-15 2015-16 12,705 2 25,410
(1st half year) (1st half year)
61. 1012062957 2014-15 2015-16 17,268 1 17,268
(2nd half year) (1st half year)
62. 1012063671 2014-15 2015-16 10,185 2 20,370
(1st half year) (1st half year)
63. 1012063800 2014-15 2015-16 39,708 2 79,416
(1st half year) (1st half year)
64. 1012045687 2013-14 2014-15 8,821 2 17,642
(1st half year) (1st half year)
65. 1012064298 2014-15 2015-16 1,16,109 2 2,32,218
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
66. 1012064299 2014-15 2015-16 34,521 2 69,042
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
67. 1012044280 2011-12 2012-13 13,682 2 27,364
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
68. 1012043989 2010-11 2012-13 44,982 4 1,79,928
(1st half year) (1st half year)
69. 1012062385 2013-14 2014-15 43,948 2 87,896
(1st half year) (1st half year)

Page 82
 Appendices

S. PT Assessment To be effected Actually PT per Delay in Total

No. No. from Effected from half year bringing to
tax net
(no. of half
years)
70. 1012046105 2013-14 2014-15 27,514 2 55,028
(1st half year) (1st half year)
71. 1012044354 2011-12 2012-13 32,426 2 64,852
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
72. 1012063352 2014-15 2015-16 25,004 2 50,008
(1st half year) (1st half year)
73. 1012044049 2010-11 2012-13 32,631 4 1,30,524
(1st half year) (1st half year)
74. 1012043684 2011-12 2012-13 2,26,344 2 4,52,688
(1st half year) (1st half year)
75. 1012046107 2013-14 2014-15 9,295 2 18,590
(1st half year) (1st half year)
76. 1012044874 2012-13 2013-14 20,863 2 41,726
(1st half year) (1st half year)
77. 1012062484 2013-14 2014-15 33,127 2 66,254
(1st half year) (1st half year)
78. 1012044173 2010-11 2012-13 10,454 4 41,816
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
79. 1012062571 2013-14 2014-15 35,514 2 71,028
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
80. 1012062997 2014-15 2016-17 22,216 4 88,864
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
81. 1012044311 2010-11 2012-13 10,895 4 43,580
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
82. 1012045796 2013-14 2014-15 68,767 2 1,37,534
(1st half year) (1st half year)
83. 1012052541 2013-14 2014-15 1,26,798 2 2,53,596
(1st half year) (1st half year)
84. 1012059233 2013-14 2014-15 88,793 2 1,77,586
(1st half year) (1st half year)
85. 1012056816 2013-14 2014-15 64,225 2 1,28,450
(1st half year) (1st half year)
86. 1012064179 2014-15 2015-16 53,200 2 1,06,400
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
87. 1012064176 2014-15 2015-16 77,670 2 1,55,340
(2nd half year) (2nd half year)
88. 1012058063 2013-14 2014-15 88,096 2 1,76,192
(1st half year) (1st half year)
89. 1012062080 2013-14 2014-15 68,138 2 1,36,276
(1st half year) (1st half year)
90. 1012051280 2013-14 2014-15 62,804 2 1,25,608
(1st half year) (1st half year)
91. 1012051410 2013-14 2014-15 1,04,548 2 2,09,096
(1st half year) (1st half year)
92. 1012050365 2013-14 2014-15 2,19,137 2 4,38,274
(1st half year) (1st half year)
93. 1012046104 2013-14 2014-15 94,264 2 1,88,528
(1st half year) (1st half year)
94. 1012053235 2013-14 2014-15 4,42,467 2 8,84,934
(1st half year) (1st half year)

Page 83
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

S. PT Assessment To be effected Actually PT per Delay in Total

No. No. from Effected from half year bringing to
tax net
(no. of half
years)
95. 1012049922 2013-14 2014-15 4,58,019 2 9,16,038
(1st half year) (1st half year)
96. 1012047873 2013-14 2014-15 91,291 2 1,82,582
(1st half year) (1st half year)
97. 1012049790 2013-14 2014-15 63,851 2 1,27,702
(1st half year) (1st half year)
98. 1012057313 2013-14 2014-15 3,56,212 2 7,12,424
(1st half year) (1st half year)
99. 1012055643 2013-14 2014-15 1,42,661 2 2,85,322
(1st half year) (1st half year)
100. 1012056210 2013-14 2014-15 65,001 2 1,30,002
(1st half year) (1st half year)
1,18,00,212

Page 84
 Appendices

Appendix – 4.3
(Reference to Paragraph No 4.5.1.4 (1), Page no. 40)
Statement showing the details of non-revision of Property Tax with reference to permission under BPS
(Area in Sq. mts and amount in `))
S. House No. PT Plinth BPS Plinth Difference Unit Land Constr Constr ARV PT half Unautho Total No. of Total
No assessment area Proceeding area as (Column 6 rate value uction uction yearly rised per half half upto
No as per No per BPS – Column value value construc year years March
PT 4) after tion upto 2017
assesse depreci charges March
ment ation 2017

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

1 14-1-56C 1012028470 30.34 14/1329415 150.06 119.72 45.00 1,796 3,591 3,232 60,336 9,955.00 9,955.00 19,910 4 79,640
2 22-8-154/a3 1012062467 227.83 22/0954715 262.02 34.19 9.50 108 217 195 3,636 454.50 454.50 909 4 3,636
3 13-6-600/44/158 1012003047 446.68 13/7099715 486.11 39.43 9.50 125 249 224 4,188 523.50 523.50 1,047 4 4,188
4 7-6-264/D 1012001683 274.5 7/0757115 293.34 18.84 9.50 60 119 107 2,004 250.50 250.50 501 4 2,004
5 2-3-364 1012015097 180.91 02/3975115 217.84 36.93 9.50 117 233 210 3,924 490.50 490.50 981 4 3,924
6 20-1-456/F1 1012013998 190.35 20/3673115 251.48 61.13 7.50 153 305 275 5,136 642.00 642.00 1,284 4 5,136
Total 24,632 98,528

Page 85
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Appendix – 4.4
(Reference to Para No 4.5.1.4 (1), Page no. 40)
Statement showing the details of cases wherein the plinth areas as per PT assessment are higher than that of BPS
S. No. House No. Property Tax Plinth area in BPS application Actual Plinth Excess plinth Month and year of
assessment No. as per PT No. area at site as area between construction
assessment BPS PT assessment As per PT As per BPS
master application and BPS assessment
(Sq. mts) (Sq. mts) (Sq. mts)

1. 20-1-470/34/N 1012044531 227.50 20/1761615 217.19 10.31 10/2014 12/2013

2. 20-7-8 1012045817 777.60 20/1096915 459.03 318.57 04/2013 01/2013
3. 8-1-188 1012016408 206.40 08/5431915 187.16 19.24 04/2013 10/2012
4. 5-2-127 1012000576 1,934.06 05/1125915 1,234.07 699.99 04/2011 10/2009
5. 6-12-17/b 1012013398 234.36 06/7541215 219.58 14.78 04/2013 11/1986
6. 19-3-14/a 1012018592 175.60 19/6891115 170.82 4.78 04/2011 04/2008
7. 20-1-470/57/g4 1012044768 78.20 20/4548515 74.03 4.17 04/2012 09/2013
8. 1-5-587/b3/301 1012063792 230.36 01/5874015 185.62 44.74 04/2014 09/2014
9. 22-8-31/a1 1012046525 506.88 22/0826115 460.03 46.85 04/2013 11/2013
10. 10-11-389a 1012027866 339.30 10/5273915 260.34 78.96 04/2014 12/2014
11. 13-6-600/44/3a 1012043498 273.00 13/1776815 116.80 156.20 10/2011 02/2011
12. 12-3-173 1012015694 218.88 12/3437115 150.42 68.46 04/2012 11/2012
13. 23-9-94 1012045796 2,975.10 23/3524715 1,266.27 1,708.83 04/2013 02/2014
14. 10-13-514 1012028122 1,059.00 10/1088115 573.03 485.97 04/2012 12/2013
15. 19-4-121/C 1012019971 926.48 19/4235815 919.82 6.66 04/2013 06/2014
16. 21-8-386/A 1012054510 301.02 21/7524315 289.46 11.56 04/2013 12/2008
17. 21-5/196 1012050919 360.00 21/6519515 173.90 186.10 04/2013 11/2002
18. 5-1-75/E 1012000435 1,364.07 05/4943115 755.61 608.46 10/2016 12/2004

Page 86
 Appendices

Appendix – 4.5
(Reference to Paragraph No 4.5.1.4 (2), Page no. 41)
Statement showing the details of BPS cases for which house number were not traced out in PT data
S. No. House No. Property Plinth area BPS application Actual Plinth Excess plinth Month and year of
Tax in as per PT No. area at site as area between construction
Assessment assessment BPS PT assessment
No. master application and BPS As per PT As per
(Sq. mts) (Sq. mts) (Sq. mts) assessment BPS

1. 19-3-1/C/1A Not found in PT data 7734515 282.68 Not applicable 04/2000

2. 7-20 Not found in PT data 7/8585416 255.74 Not applicable 07/2002
3. 5-320/20 Not found in PT data 4/5077815 338.95 Not applicable 07/2012
4. 3-207 Not found in PT data 03/1248715 110.07 Not applicable 11/2013

Page 87
 Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Appendix – 4.6
(Reference to Paragraph No 4.7.1, Page no. 46)
Statement showing the details of shops vacant for long period in shopping complexes
(Amount in `)
Sl. Name of the shopping complex Shop Date on No. of Rent on Loss of
No. No. which shops months the date Rent
fall vacant of
vacancy
1. TML Bypass Road 1st Floor 4 26.06.2014 34 6,000 2,04,000
2. TML Bypass Road 1st Floor 7 26.06.2014 34 9,000 3,06,000
3. Old Municipal Office 1st Floor 1 15.02.2017 2 84,200 1,68,400
4. Leelamahal Shopping Complex 15 01.05.2016 11 935 10,285
5. Leelamahal Shopping Complex 51 01.05.2016 11 1,470 16,170
6. Leelamahal Shopping Complex 55 16.11.2015 17 5,150 87,550
7. Leelamahal Shopping Complex 57 01.05.2016 11 2,260 24,860
Total 8,17,265

Appendix – 4.7
(Reference to Paragraph No 4.8.1 (i), Page no. 47)
Statement showing the details of non-collection of Open Space Contribution charges
(Amount in `)
Sl. Building Usage of Total site Total Built Open space Actual Short
No. Application No. Building Area up Area contribution to Collection Collection
(Sq. mts) (Sq. mts) be collected
1. 17/TPBAG2/2014 Commercial 6,925.42 1321.90 60,98,400 Nil 60,98,400
2. 34/TPBAG2/2014 Residential 3,716.17 8851.65 47,77,500 Nil 47,77,500
3. 193/TPBAG1/2014 Residential 1,258.99 3020.47 23,12,016 Nil 23,12,016
4. 41/TPBAG1/2015 Commercial 435.64 753.48 18,62,490 Nil 18,62,490
5. 54/TPBAG12015 Residential 3,545.96 9423.60 76,23,000 Nil 76,23,000
Total: 2,26,73,406 Nil 2,26,73,406

Page 88
 Appendices

Appendix – 4.8
(Reference to Paragraph No 4.8.1 (ii), Page no. 47)
Statement showing the details of non-collection of Betterment charges
(Amount in `)
Sl. Building Application Usage of Total site Betterment Actual Short
No. No. Building Area charges to be Collection Collection
(Sq. mts) collected
1. 34/TPBAG2/2014 Residential 3,716.17 4,45,940 Nil 4,45,940
2 144/TPBAG3/2014 Residential 455.39 54,646 Nil 54,646
3 153/TPBAG3/2014 Residential 394.392 47,327 Nil 47,327
4 174/TPBAG1/2014 Residential 368.52 44,222 Nil 44,222
5 193/TPBAG1/2014 Residential 1,258.99 1,51,078 Nil 1,51,078
6 041/TPBAG1/2015 Commercial 435.64 65,346 Nil 65,346
7 048/TPBAG1/2015 Residential 1,906.70 2,28,804 Nil 2,28,804
8 054/TPBAG12015 Residential 3,260.66 3,91,279 Nil 3,91,279
9. 65/TPBAG1/2015 Commercial 752.42 1,12,863 Nil 1,12,863
Total 15,41,505 Nil 15,41,505

Appendix – 4.9
(Reference to Paragraph No 4.8.1 (iii), Page no. 47)
Statement showing the details of short collection of development charges
(Amount in `)
Sl. Building Application No. Usage Development Actual Short
No charges to be Collection Collection
collected
1 05-TPBAG2-2015 Residential 26,167 10,567 15,600
2 135-TPBAG3-2014 Residential 30,953 18,653 12,300
3 65-TPBAG1-2015 Residential 72,601 3,701 68,900
4 137-TPBAG1-2014 Commercial 57,847 14,527 43,320
5 174-TPBAG1-2014 Residential 36,341 6,341 30,000
6 136-TPBAG3-2014 Residential 51,318 39,988 11,330
7 49-TPBAG2-2014 Residential 1,07,181 35,991 71,190
8 101-TPBAG2-2015 Residential 57,655 3,545 54,110
9 25-TPBAG2-2015 Commercial 17,21,892 16,96,392 25,500
10 73-TPBAG1-2012 Residential 52,422 2,922 49,500
11 105-TPBAG2-2013 Residential 30,443 5,943 24,500
12 124-TPBAG1-2012 Residential 80,125 14,125 66,000
13 180-TPBAG1-2012 Residential 8,148 8,148 0
14 87-TPBAG2-2013 Residential 30,325 23,925 6,400
15 1012/B/135/TIR/GN/2017 Residential 30,423 29,853 570
16 1012/75/B/TIR/TP/2016 Residential 28,307 2,957 25,350
17 1012/386/B/TIR/ZPR/2016 Commercial 18,68,391 3,26,341 15,42,050

Page 89
 Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Sl. Building Application No. Usage Development Actual Short

No charges to be Collection Collection
collected
18 1012/0105/B/TIR/2016 Commercial 14,862 5,452 9,410
19 1012/0041/B/TIR/SP/2016 Residential 38,786 4,476 34,310
20 1012/005/B/TIR/KN/2016 Commercial 16,323 1,243 15,080
21 1012/0014/B/TIR/TP/2016 Residential 25,792 2,852 22,940
22 1012/0005/B/TIR/CC/2017 Residential 20,844 6,704 14,140
23 73/TPBAG3/2015 Residential 22,745 5,845 16,900
24 1012/131/B/TIR/AKMP/2016 Residential 1,95,703 21,133 1,74,570
25 1012/0080/B/TIR/NBC/2016 Residential 28,044 3,384 24,660
46,53,638 22,95,008 23,58,630

Appendix -4.10
(Reference to Paragraph No 4.8.3, Page no. 48)
Statement showing the details of short collection of Labour Cess
(Amount in `)
Sl. Building Application No. Total Plinth Labour Cess
No. Area To be Actual Short
(Sq. mts) collected Collection Collection

1. 2012-TPBAG1-231 412.34 35,938 0 35,938

2. 2012-TPBAG1-244 271.33 25,399 0 25,399
3 2012-TPBAG1-321 1,658.35 1,55,241 0 1,55,241
4 2014-TPBAG1-0014 487.80 45,663 0 45,663
5 2014-TPBAG1-0034 2,425.68 2,27,072 0 2,27,072
6 2014-TPBAG1-0035 685.00 64,125 0 64,125
7 2014-TPBAG1-0063 107.28 9,350 0 9,350
8 2014-TPBAG1-0044 138.72 12,090 0 12,090
9 2014-TPBAG1-0137 1,197.66 1,12,115 10,000 1,02,115
10 2014-TPBAG1-0174 965.67 90,398 20,000 70,398
11 2015-TPBAG1-038 165.36 14,412 0 14,412
12 2015-TPBAG1-041 753.48 70,534 30,000 40,534
13 2015-TPBAG1-043 492.72 46,124 18,500 27,624
14 2015-TPBAG1-045 443.51 41,517 20,000 21,517
15 2015-TPBAG1-048 5,951.74 5,57,150 90,000 4,67,150
16 2015-TPBAG1-054 9,423.60 8,82,162 35,000 8,47,162
17 B.A.NO.65/2015/G1 2,021.88 1,89,272 0 1,89,272
18 2014-TPBAG2-017 1,321.90 1,15,211 0 1,15,211
19 2014-TPBAG2-022 496.44 43,267 0 43,267
20 2014-TPBAG2-034 10,888.46 10,19,290 49,000 9,70,290
21 2014-TPBAG2-049 2,909.12 2,72,328 0 2,72,328
22 2014-TPBAG2-071 336.09 29,292 0 29,292
23 2014-TPBAG2-081 1,577.04 1,47,629 0 1,47,629
24 2014-TPBAG2-094 900.868 84,332 0 84,332
25 2014-TPBAG2-114 672.60 58,621 46,000 12,621
26 2014-TPBAG2-118 1,253.07 1,17,302 45,000 72,302
27 2015-TPBAG2-005 692.68 64,843 15,000 49,843
28 2015-TPBAG2-006 893.30 83,623 15,000 68,623

Page 90
 Appendices

Sl. Building Application No. Total Plinth Labour Cess

No. Area To be Actual Short
(Sq. mts) collected Collection Collection

29 2015-TPBAG2-025 5,097.30 4,44,260 36,470 4,07,790

30 2014-TPBAG3-097 725.72 67,936 0 67,936
31 2014-TPBAG3-114 870.24 81,464 49,000 32,464
32 2014-TPBAG3-132 8,122.57 7,60,370 1,50,000 6,10,370
33 2014-TPBAG3-135 817.45 76,523 0 76,523
34 2014-TPBAG3-136 1,619.32 1,51,587 25,000 1,26,587
35 2014-TPBAG3-144 776.49 67,675 40,000 27,675
36 2014-TPBAG3-153 1,010.47 94,592 35,000 59,592
37 2015-TPBAG3-073 724.96 67,864 11,000 56,864
38 2015-TPBAG3-080 623.54 54,345 5,900 48,445
39 2015-TPBAG3-101 1,803.68 1,68,846 1,55,000 13,846
40 087/TPBAG2/2013 809.95 75,821 15,000 60,821
41 090/TPBAG2/2013 209.82 18,287 0 18,287
42 180/TPBAG2/2012 192.81 16,804 0 16,804
43 178/TPBAG1/2012 268.05 23,362 0 23,362
44 191/TPBAG1/2012 338.91 29,538 0 29,538
45 197/TPBAG1/2012 680.96 63,746 0 63,746
46 199/TPBAG1/2012 318.93 27,796 0 27,796
47 200/TPBAG1/2012 656.40 61,446 0 61,446
48 077/TPBAG2/2013 174.52 15,210 0 15,210
49 072/TPBAG1/2013 290.08 25,282 0 25,282
50 163/TPBAG2/2013 156.54 13,643 0 13,643
51 135/TPBAG2/2013 1,106.80 1,03,609 0 1,03,609
52 122/TPBAG2/2013 659.64 61,750 0 61,750
53 106/TPBAG2/2013 136.30 11,879 0 11,879
54 109/TPBAG1/2012 7,482.35 7,00,489 0 7,00,489
55 124/TPBAG1/2012 2,197.40 2,05,703 0 2,05,703
56 105/TPBAG2/2013 811.255 75,943 0 75,943
57 054/TPBAG1/2013 1,053.04 91,778 0 91,778
58 193/TPBAG1/2014 3,020.47 2,82,752 70,000 2,12,752
59 1012/0017/B/TIR/KT/2016 53.45 4,658 0 4,658
60 1012/0135/B/TIR/GN/2017 937.01 81,666 11,204 70,462
61 1012/0294/B/TIR/UN/2016 1,714.32 1,49,413 1,47,122 2,291
62 1012/257/B/TIR/TP/2016 855.47 74,559 71,667 2,892
63 1012/259/B/TIR/MRP/2016 967.33 84,308 83,081 1,227
64 1012/0005/B/TIR/CC/2017 527.51 49,381 42,468 6,913
Total 89,98,585 13,41,412 76,57,173

Page 91
 Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Appendix – 4.11
(Reference to Paragraph No 4.10.2.1(i), Page no. 50)
Statement showing avoidable expenditure on Current Consumption Charges
(Amount in `)
Month & Year Actual Expected monthly Difference Demand Rate per Amount
consumption consumption units per (2-3) raised unit (4*6)
of units month (after (5/2)
completion of LED
project)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
August, 2015 2,66,940 1,52,646 1,14,294 21,40,181 8.02 9,16,638
September, 2015 2,74,656 1,52,646 1,22,010 21,85,419 7.96 9,71,200
October, 2015 2,59,042 1,52,646 1,06,396 20,67,226 7.98 8,49,040
November, 2015 2,31,751 1,52,646 79,105 18,65,436 8.04 6,36,004
December, 2015 2,28,320 1,52,646 75,674 18,28,392 8.00 6,05,392
January, 2016 2,36,100 1,52,646 83,454 18,68,289 7.91 6,60,121
February, 2016 2,31,532 1,52,646 78,886 18,52,776 8.00 6,31,088
March, 2016 2,23,455 1,52,646 70,809 19,21,721 8.60 6,08,957
April, 2016 2,06,876 1,52,646 54,230 17,47,741 8.45 4,58,244
May, 2016 1,96,332 1,52,646 43,686 16,14,270 8.22 3,59,099
June, 2016 1,67,633 1,52,646 14,987 16,46,446 9.82 1,47,172
July, 2016 1,67,996 1,52,646 15,350 15,53,609 9.24 1,41,834
Total 69,84,789

Appendix – 4.12
(Reference to Paragraph No 4.10.2.1 (ii), Page no. 51)
Statement showing the expenditure incurred over and above the expected number of
units of consumption
(Amount in `)
Month & Year Actual Expected Difference Demand Rate per Amount
consumption monthly (2-3) raised unit (4*6)
units consumption (5/2)
units
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
August, 2016 1,85,505 1,52,646 32,859 17,97,558 9.69 3,18,404
September, 2016 1,68,600 1,52,646 15,954 16,60,234 9.85 1,57,147
October, 2016 1,69,463 1,52,646 16,817 17,04,251 10.05 1,69,011
November, 2016 1,58,105 1,52,646 5,459 15,75,966 9.97 54,426
December, 2016 1,63,295 1,52,646 10,649 16,10,805 9.86 1,04,999
January, 2017 1,52,544 1,52,646 (-)102 - - -
February, 2017 1,63,377 1,52,646 10,731 15,62,489 9.56 1,02,588
March, 2017 1,46,495 1,52,646 (-)6,151 - - -
Total 9,06,575

Page 92
 Appendices

Appendix - 5.1 (a)

(Reference to Paragraph no. 5.1.5.1, Page no. 57)
Statement showing the details of split works costing above `50 lakh
(` in lakh)
Sl. Name of Name of the works which were split No. of Estimated Total
No. the ULB works into cost of each cost of
which the work split
works were works
split
1 Proddatur The work– laying of CC roads and construction of 2 49.00 82.00
cc drains in 6th and 7th election wards was split into
33.00
package 5 and 5A
2 The work relating to 7th, 8th, 9th and 11th election 2 47.50 71.50
wards was split in to package 6 and 6A
24.00
th th
3 The work relating to wards 15 and 16 was split 3 48.00 103.50
into package 8, 8A and 9 11.50
44.00
4 The work relating to wards 28th and 29th was split 2 49.50 83.50
into package 17 and 18
34.00
th
5 The work relating to wards 35 and 36th was split 2 43.50 86.00
into packages 21 and 21A
42.50
th th th
6 The work relating to 37 , 38 and 39 wards was 2 46.50 76.50
split into package 22 and 22A
30.00
7 Nandyal (i) Widening of road from Municipal office to 2 39.00 77.50
House No.25/419-A in Saleem Nagar and
(ii) Widening of Road from EP No.SN-III/3 to road 38.50
end in Saleem Nagar
8 Guntur Widening of Suddapalli Donka Main Road with BT 4 48.80 195.20
Hot Mix from Ponnur Road to Lakshmi Nagar into 48.80
four reaches 48.80
48.80
9 Guntur (i) Providing BT hot mix road from Lakshmipuram 3 40.50 115.29
main road reliance market to bakers Fun
Lakshmipuram Main road Naidupet 5th Line in
Ring Road in AE.1 section in Division 37 to 40
(ii) Providing BT hot mix road from Naidupet 5th 24.80
Line to NeelamSanjeeva Reddy Statue in Ring
Road 5th Line in Ring Road in AE.1 section in
Division 37 to 40

(iii) Providing BT hot mix road from Neelam 49.99

Sanjeeva Reddy Statue to upto Chandramouli
Nagar 5th line AE.1 section in Division 37 to 40

Total 890.99

Page 93
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Appendix - 5.1 (b)

(Reference to Paragraph no. 5.1.5.1, Page no. 57)
Statement showing the details of split works costing above `10 lakh
(` in lakh)
Sl. Name of the Name of the works which were split No. of Estimated Total
No. ULB works into cost of each cost of
which the work split
works works
were split
1 Nandyal 1. Laying of CC Road in Padmavathi 2 10.00 18.60
Nagar from S V Nursing Home to D
No.29/335-E-47 (Chainage 0.0 to 110 m)
in Ward No. 14;
2. Laying of CC Road in Padmavathi 8.60
Nagar from S V Nursing Home to D
No.29/335-E-47 (Chainage 110 to 170 m)
in Ward No.14
2 Machilipatnam (i) Providing CC approach Road to 4 9.52 38.05
Kendriya Vidyalaya Road from
Sundaraiah Nagar Culvert to Dumping
Yard along Edepalli Drain;
(ii) Providing CC approach Road to 9.51
Kendriya Vidyalaya Road from Dumping
Yard to Culvert along Edepalli Drain
(iii) Providing CC approach Road to 9.52
Kendriya Vidyalaya Road from Culvert to
Cross Road along Edepalli Drain
(iv) Providing CC approach Road to 9.50
Kendriya Vidyalaya Road from Cross
Road to Bypass Road along Edepalli
Drain
3 Machilipatnam (i) CC Road from EP No.29/199 to 19/232 3 9.86 27.89
(ii) CC Road from EP No.29/232 to 9.59
19/236
(iii) CC Road from EP No.29/236 to 8.44
Bypass Road
4 Machilipatnam (i) CC Road from EP No.19/53 to 19/60 in 3 7.66 19.80
YSR Colony
(ii) CC Road from EP No.19/60 to 19/63 6.68
in YSR Colony
(iii) CC Road from EP No.19/63 to 19/65 5.46
in YSR Colony
5 Machilipatnam Providing CC Road to Head Water Works 2 9.77 19.25
Road in 34th ward into two bits i.e., Bit No.
9.48
1 & Bit No. 2
Total 123.59

Page 94
 Appendices

Appendix – 5.2
(Reference to Paragraph no. 5.1.5.4(1), Page no. 58)
Statement showing the delay in concluding agreement
(` in lakh)
Sl. Name of the work Estimated Date of Date of Delay in
No. Value Letter of Agreement concluding
Acceptance Agreement
(LOA)
issued
1 Providing wet mix road Alapati Nagar 3rd 7.00 07.04.16 13.12.16 8 months
main road in between 2nd and 3rd cross
roads in 28th ward of Tenali Municipality
2 Laying of CC Road a Pothuraju colony 10.00 05.08.16 13.12.16 4 months
cross roads 5 Nos and NTR colony in 14th
ward of Tenali Municipality
3 Providing CC road at 25th ward from 49.90 03.06.16 11.12.16 6 months
Anjaneya Swamy temple to Full Gospel
Church in Bhimavaram Municipality.
4 Removal of old single line divider and 37.08 08.10.15 04.10.16 12 months
providing new double divider and
gardening from Shivaji chowk to Paladri
canal at Burripalem road in Tenali
Municipality
5 Providing CC Road and drain from BN 25.00 01.03.14 23.06.16 27 months
road to Gullankivari veedhi in
Vasanthalavari veedhi in 17th ward (SC
area) Bhimavaram Municipality.

Appendix – 5.3
(Reference to Paragraph no. 5.1.5.4(2), Page no. 59)
Statement showing the delay in completion of works
(` in lakh)
Sl. Name of the Name of the work Estimate Date of Stipulated Actual date of
No. ULB value concluding date of completion/ status
Agreement completion as of April 2017
1 Proddatur Laying of CC Road and 44.50 08.05.15 5 months In progress
construction of CC
Drain in 10th and 12th
Election wards (package
7)
2 Proddatur Laying of CC Road and 48.00 25.03.15 5 months In progress
construction of CC
Drain in 15th and 16th
Election wards (package
8)
3 Proddatur Laying of CC Road and 35.00 25.03.15 5 months In progress
construction of CC

Page 95
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Sl. Name of the Name of the work Estimate Date of Stipulated Actual date of
No. ULB value concluding date of completion/ status
Agreement completion as of April 2017
Drain in 19th and 20th
Election wards (package
11)
4 Proddatur Laying of CC Road from 9.99 09.06.16 3 months In progress
6/843 to 6/774 in 32nd
Election Ward
5 Adoni Laying of CC road at 9.10 01.08.15 3 months 09.01.16
NGOs colony from LIG
6 to MIG 191 and
LIGH1 105 to LIGH1
107
6 Adoni Laying of CC Drain 8.75 13.10.15 3 months 27.08.16
from D No.6/313/1 to
6/307/11, pole
No.D3/57/28 and CC
Road at D No.6/611,
6/252-2 to 6/252-4
beside Bobulamma
Temple at Teliwada in E
W No.32
7 Adoni Laying of CC Road & 9.95 13.11.15 3 months 20.09.16
CC Drain from D
No.23/467 to 23/527,
23/523 and Chinna
Market main road to
Jandakatta Sandu in
Carvanpeta in E W
No.12
8 Adoni Laying of BT Road from 27.12 26.02.14 1 month 09.05.14
MIG 368 to HIG-38 and
from MIG 161 to MIG
142 in Adoni
Municipality in Ward
No.5
9 Adoni Laying of BT road from 22.28 26.02.14 1 month 08.05.14
No.9 from 1/541/86
(Raghavendra Plot 69 b)
from 9a D No.1/677/3a,
AAS main road, Road 9a
from 1/541/96-ASS
Main Road and Road 10
at D No.1/541/86 to
MIG-157, MIG-18 in
Adoni Municipality in
Ward No.5
10 Adoni Laying of CC Road, CC 9.90 26.06.15 3 months 26.10.16
drain and CC culvert at
D No.12/231, 12/376 to
Pole No.D3/2/9, D
No.12/211 via Pole
No.D1/2/3 to 12/245 at
Mahayogi

Page 96
 Appendices

Sl. Name of the Name of the work Estimate Date of Stipulated Actual date of
No. ULB value concluding date of completion/ status
Agreement completion as of April 2017
Lakshmamma temple in
E W No.27
11 Machilipatnam Providing CC road 4.60 16.04.16 15.06.16 16.01.17
Gangaiahgari layout
cross roads at Veeranki
Madhusudhana rao
Street in 5th ward
12 Machilipatnam Providing CC road by 9.41 27.02.15 26.05.15 25.08.15
the side of FCI godown
from X road to Koneru
Road in 5th ward
13 Machilipatnam Providing CC road from 7.71 17.08.15 16.09.15 27.11.15
Park to Driver Colony
approach road in HB
colony Ward No.1
14 Machilipatnam Providing CC road and 9.18 04.02.15 03.05.15 11.12.15
drain Rajupeta
Anganwadi Kendram
road to end and
connecting road in Ward
No.31
15 Machilipatnam Laying of CC road from 9.99 18.04.16 17.06.16 23.11.16
Chinna Ulliginpalem
culvert EP.No.24/38 in
24th ward
16 Tenali Removal of old single 37.08 04.10.16 03.03.17 Not commenced
line divider and
providing new double
divider and gardening
from Shivaji chowk to
Paladri canal at
Burripalem road
17 Tenali Laying of CC road from 4.95 10.02.17 09.04.17 Not completed
Pati canal towards North
(SC area) 2nd ward
18 Tenali Laying of CC road from 4.75 10.02.17 09.04.17 Not completed
Gummadi Ramesh
House towards west in
2nd ward
19 Tenali Construction of internal 4.90 10.02.17 09.04.17 Not completed
CC road in 39th ward
20 Bhimavaram Providing CC road and 25.00 23.06.16 22.09.16 In progress
drain from BN road to
Gullankivari veedhi in
Vasathala vari veedhi in
17th ward SC area
21 Tiruvuru Providing CC road from 10.80 14.10.16 13.12.16 In progress
Ramu house to Buddiah
House in 4th ward under
SCSP grant
22 Tiruvuru Providing CC road from 9.15 18.03.17 13.04.17 In progress
Bhagavandas church to

Page 97
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

Sl. Name of the Name of the work Estimate Date of Stipulated Actual date of
No. ULB value concluding date of completion/ status
Agreement completion as of April 2017
Rayala Aadham house in
15th ward under SCSP
23 Tiruvuru Providing CC road from 7.00 08.03.17 03.04.17 In progress
K. Venkateswara Rao
Rice mill to Mukker
Sowbhagyam House in
3rd ward
24 Tiruvuru Providing gravel road to 9.98 09.12.14 08.03.15 In progress
improve internal roads
in Bhagat Singh colony
25 Tiruvuru Providing CC road from 7.80 05.07.16 04.09.16 31.10.16
Kambhapati Nageswara
Rao house to E.
Raghavaiah house in
13th ward
26 Tiruvuru Laying of CC road from 3.99 28.02.16 30.04.16 13.06.16
R&B road in Muslim
Bazar in 10th ward
27 Tiruvuru Providing CC road from 8.63 07.07.16 06.09.16 31.10.16
Sudhir Reddy kirana
shop to Eleswarapu
Kumar raja house in 4th
ward
28 Tiruvuru Providing CC road from 4.80 22.10.16 21.12.16 23.03.17
Talluri Nageswara Rao
to Talluri Guravaiah
house in 14th ward
29 Tiruvuru Providing CC road from 3.94 22.10.16 21.12.16 04.03.17
Vemulakonda
Padmavathi house to
Gunja Laxmi house in
15th ward
30 Tiruvuru Providing CC road from 4.45 22.10.16 21.12.16 04.03.17
Talluri Gopayya house
to Talluri Ramulu house
in 15th ward

Page 98
 Appendices

Appendix – 5.4
(Reference to Paragraph no. 5.1.5.4(2), Page no. 59)
List of works for which agreements were concluded but not commenced
(` in lakh)
S. No Work Description Estimate Agreement Stipulated
Value Date date of
completion
1 Providing patch work with hot mix BT 9.05 06.11.14 03.12.14
infront of BR stadium gate (Tenali bus
stop to Lal Thalab mosque)
2 Providing hot mix BT patch work on 7.90 04.10.14 17.11.14
existing pipe line leak trenches in Ponnur
road both sides from Kodigudu Satram to
Kanaka Durgamma temple
3 Providing BT patches at AT. Agraharam 8.00 27.01.15 07.03.15
area in AE-VIII section
4 Formation of WBM road at ST colony 5.30 22.06.15 25.06.15
main road from Janda Chettu upto west
connecting Mallavaram R&B road in
Pedapalakaluru in div. no.54
5 Construction of CC road from Pasupuleti 4.10 31.05.16 26.06.16
Bullaiah house to Babu complex
compound wall in Naidupet at Pothuru in
div. no.58
6 Providing of CC road from Gogisetty 6.30 18.05.16 04.07.16
Srilakshmi house to Sk. Mastan house in
Naidupet at Pothuru in div. no.58
7 Providing hot mix BT road at Suddapalli 47.00 29.10.16 15.01.17
Donka main road from Lakshmi Nagar
6th line to drainage pump house div no.
5 in AE-6 l B Nagar (General)
8 Widening of Sudda Palli Donka main 48.80 29.10.16 15.01.17
road with hot mix BT road from
Christian Burial ground to Mugudam
Nagar 3rd line (reach-2) in div no. 6 in
AE-6 l B Nagar
9 Widening of Suddapalli Donka main 48.80 29.10.16 15.01.17
road with BT hot mix road from
Mugudum Nagar 3rd line to Naga
Lakshmi Nagar (reach-II) in AE-6 l B
Nagar
10 Widening of Suddapalli Donka main 48.80 29.10.16 15.01.17
road with BT hot mix from Naga
Lakshmi Nagar to Naga Lakshmi Nagar
(reach-4) in AE-6 L B. Nagar
11 Widening of Suddapalli Donka main 48.80 29.10.16 15.01.17
road with BT hot mix road from Ponnur

Page 99
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended 31 March 2017

S. No Work Description Estimate Agreement Stipulated

Value Date date of
completion
road to Christian Burial Ground (reach-
1) in div no. 5 AE-6
12 Revised of providing CC roads to SC 42.00 26.11.16 15.01.17
colony internal roads and main road at
Etukuru. 1) Etukuri Vijaya Saradhi house
road 2) Nalla Venkata Rao house road 3)
Burial Ground road(old T.S
no.428/SE/15-16)
13 Providing CC road raising of CC drains 3.50 22.06.16 20.08.16
and man holes at Rajaka Ramalayam 1st
line in div no. 42
14 Providing CC pavement from China 10.00 23.12.16 13.03.17
library center to upto Majid center in
Gorantla in div no.57 under AE-1 section
15 Providing CC pavement from Kasu 7.50 22.12.16 13.03.17
China Sambireddy house to Chalvadi
Sambasiva Rao house in Gorantla under
AE-1 section
16 Construction of C.C drains and providing 20.45 18.01.17 14.03.17
BT road at Pattabhi Sitarama Nagar 5th
line balance portion in Gorantla under
AE-1 section
17 Providing BT hot mix to the road from 35.00 18.01.17 12.02.17
Sri Chaitanya college (Porumalla Bazar)
to up to inner ring road in Gorantla under
GMC in AE-1 section
18 Providing BT hot mix from Sheham 49.00 18.01.17 12.02.17
Yedukondalu house to connection road
of inner ring road in Gorantla under
GMC in AE-1 section
19 Providing hot mix road to Lakshmi 39.50 18.01.17 12.02.17
Puram 4th line from Hari Harmahal road
to upto Chandramouli Nagar 1st line in
div no.37 under AE-1 section
20 Providing hot mix BT patch work at 4.90 27.10.16 12.12.16
various places in AE-3 section
21 Providing wet mix with dry chips to 4.90 25.01.17 16.04.17
Mother Therissa colony main road in
Reddy Palem in div no.62
22 Providing wet mix with dry chips to 4.90 25.01.17 18.04.17
Mother Therissa colony main road in
Reddy Palem div no.62
23 Providing hot mix BT road to 1st cross 48.80 18.03.17 01.04.17
road of Chandramouli Nagar from D.N.
Murthy bunglaw road upto east 1st line
in div no.36
24 Supply and filling of gravel and red earth 4.50 21.04.17 17.05.17
in central dividers at GT road from

Page 100
 Appendices

S. No Work Description Estimate Agreement Stipulated

Value Date date of
completion
masthan dharga to chuttugunta center in
AE-VII section
25 Providing WBM road to Ramanjaneyulu 13.40 01.05.17 21.06.17
colony main road from summer tank upto
north in Adavitakkellapadu in div no.56
26 Providing central lines marking from rob 5.00 22.02.17 19.04.17
to TB and ZP road in div no.23,24
27 Providing central lines marking and studs 5.00 22.02.17 19.05.17
at IB road in div no.23,24
28 Providing widening and hot mix BT road 5.00 22.02.17 19.05.17
at ZP office road from transformer to
gate to in div no.23 (reach-II)
29 Providing widening and hot mix BT road 5.00 22.02.17 19.05.17
at ZP office road from collector office
road to transformer in div no.23(reach-i)
30 Providing wet mix road from Telugu 4.90 18.04.17 20.04.17
Velugu apartment road to connecting
Peekalavagu road in div no.24 under AE-
IV section.
31 Formation of WBM road at Jundus 5.00 12.05.17 11.06.17
Chunduru burial ground road in div
no.59 AE-9

Appendix - 5.5
(Reference to Paragraph no. 5.4, Page no. 66)
Service Tax payment details of Tuni Municipality
(` in lakh)
S. No Period Service Penalty Interest Total Date of payment
Tax
1 June 2007 to March 2010 15.95 11.14 12.25 39.34 24th January 2015
2 April 2012 to September 2012 3.69 - - 3.69 10th April 2017
3 October 2012 to March 2014 12.90 - - 12.90 19th July 2016
4 April 2014 to December 2014 6.05 - - 6.05 12th May 2015
th
5 January 2015 to March 2015 1.85 - - 1.85 8 August 2015
Total 40.44 11.14 12.25 63.83
* Service Tax for the period April 2010 to March 2012 was not paid as the subject matter is pending in the
Appellate Tribunal.

Page 101
Glossary of Abbreviations

Pages 103 - 107

 Glossary

AC Abstract Contingent

ADPs Annual Development Plans

AMRUT Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation

APFC Andhra Pradesh Financial Code

APPR Act Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act

APPWD Andhra Pradesh Public Works Department

APSS Andhra Pradesh Standard Specifications

APTC Andhra Pradesh Treasury Code

APTP Act Andhra Pradesh Town Planning Act

APTRANSCO Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation

ARV Annual Rental Value

BIS Bureau of Indian Standards

BPS Building Penalisation Scheme

BT Black Top

CAG Comptroller and Auditor General of India

CDMA Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration

CDP City Development Plan

CEO Chief Executive Officer

CFC Central Finance Commission

CPR&RD Commissioner of Panchayat Raj & Rural Development

CSS Centrally Sponsored Schemes

DC Detailed Contingent

Page 103
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended March 2017

DCB Demand, Collection and Balance

DDO Drawing and Disbursing Officer

DDP Desert Development Programme

DEABAS Double Entry Accrual Based Accounting System

DPC Act Duties, Powers and Conditions of Service Act

DPC District Planning Committee

DPOs District Panchayat Officers

DPRs Detailed Project Reports

DSA Director of State Audit

DTCP Director of Town & Country Planning

EESL Energy Efficiency Service Limited

EMD Earnest Money Deposit

ENC Engineer-in-Chief

EOT Extension of Time

FFC Fourteenth Finance Commission

GIS Geographic Information System

GMC Guntur Municipal Corporation

GoAP Government of Andhra Pradesh

GoI Government of India

GP Gram Panchayat

GPMS Government Project Monitoring System

GVMC Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation

Page 104
 Glossary

HMC Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

HoDs Head of Departments

HUDCO Housing and Urban Development Corporation

IHSDP Integrated Housing Slum Development Programme

IRs Inspection Reports

JNNURM Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission

LED Light Emitting Diode

LOA Letter of Acceptance

MA & UD Municipal Administration & Urban Development

MGNREGS Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme

MIS Management Information System

MoUD Ministry of Urban Development

MPDOs Mandal Parishad Development Officers

MPP Mandal Praja Parishad

MRO Mandal Revenue Officer

O&M Operation & Maintenance

OC Occupancy Certificate

PPB Pattadar Pass Books

PR&RD Panchayat Raj & Rural Development

PRIASoft Panchayat Raj Institutions Accounting Software

PRIs Panchayat Raj Institutions

PS Panchayat Secretary

Page 105
Audit Report on ‘Local Bodies’ for the year ended March 2017

PSU Public Sector Undertaking

PT Property Tax

PTB Property Tax Board

PHED Public Health and Engineering Department

R&B Roads and Buildings

RDO Revenue Divisional Officer

RDPs Road Development Plans

RJIL Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited

RR Act Revenue Recovery Act

RWHS Rain Water Harvesting Scheme

RWS&S Rural Water Supply & Sanitation

SBR Sequencing Batch Reactor

SCSP Scheduled Castes Sub-Plan

SFC State Finance Commission

SLBs Service Level Benchmarks

SS Summer Storage

SSAAT Society for Social Audit ,Accountability and Transparency

STP Sewerage Treatment Plant

SWD Storm Water Drainage

TGS Technical Guidance And Supervision

TMC Tirupati Municipal Corporation

TPQC Third Party Quality Control

Page 106
 Glossary

TSP Tribal Sub-Plan

UCs Utilisation Certificates

UDA Urban Development Authority

UGD Underground Drainage

UIDSSMT Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for Small and Medium Towns

ULBs Urban Local Bodies

V&E Vigilance & Enforcement

WSP Waste Stabilization Pond

ZGS Zilla Grandhalaya Samstha

ZP Zilla Parishad

ZPP Zilla Praja Parishad

Page 107
 ©COMPTROLLER AND
AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA
www.cag.gov.in

www.agap.cag.gov.in