Another panel set up to study IIAS probe report

Most charges of irregularities — both administrative and financial — pertain to 1999-2000 and 2004-2005.

The newly-formed governing body, now headed by Prof Bhalchandra Mungekar, had last week discussed the Bandyopadhyaya committee report. ‘There were sufficient grounds to proceed on the report but we thought of having a fresh look at the findings by a higher panel,’’ a member of the governing body told The Indian Express over phone from Delhi.

Two weeks ago, Union Human Resource Minister (HRD) Minister Arjun Singh sent a communication to Prof Mungekar, informing him that the ministry had already accepted the Bandyopadhyaya committee report and advised him to place the findings before the governing body for appropriate action. ‘‘ The governing body has the power to take action against those indicted by the inquiry,’’ said a HRD official.

The Bandyopadhyaya report had come down heavily on top IIAS officials including previous chairman Dr G.C Pande and also its director for serious lapses in organsing seminars, awarding fellowships, and approving structurally flawed and administratively infirm projects, all of which he said cost it crores of rupees. Some of the projects, cleared in haste without following codal formalities, did not take off at all, the report says.

A few glaring instances quoted in the report about wasteful expenditure include release of grants to some organisations like Akhil Bharatiya Veda Raksha Samiti for holding seminars on the campus. ‘‘There was nothing academic about the event. It was a propagandist venture,’’ the report says, adding that more than Rs 4 lakh were spent on gifts to vedic scholars.

In one of the sammelans, for which IIAS picked tab, participants included two former prime ministers, Narasimha Rao and A.B Vajpayee, HRD Minister Murli Manohar Joshi and Sri Shankaracharya Swami Jayendra Saraswati.

On this, the Bandopadhyaya report says: ‘‘Like inter-locked corporate directors, who often manipulate company funds, interlocked academicians in this case neatly and swiftly siphoned off public funds for a private non-academic religious event. Director of the Institute, directly responsible for sanctioning of funds, has no powers to fund a totally non-academic religious function which amount to a gross financial impropriety.’’

The committee had recommended more than 12 points to check such lapses in the future.