LUCKNOW, November 9: The Uttar Pradesh Government has ordered a two-tier high level inquiry into the allegations of corruption in the construction of the Rs 83.41-crore Ambedkar Park, an ambitious project launched by the Mayawati government.According to an official release here this evening, although the Kalyan Singh cabinet had in principle taken the decision to get the construction of the Park under scrutiny in its meeting on October 29 last, the decision today has been taken in view of the serious and extensive nature of the issue.The release said while the Comptroller and Accountant General (CAG) was being requested to go into the issue of misuse of public funds in the construction of the park, T George Joseph, Chairman, greater NOIDA, has been entrusted with the task of completing an inquiry into the financial and administrative irregularities involved in it. Joseph has been given one month's time to submit his report.According to the release, one aspect of the high level inquiry ordered was to probe whether work completed on the Ambedkar Park Projected met the stipulated quality standards.While going into this aspect, George Joseph would be allowed to avail the assistance of the technical department of greater NOIDA.He will also go into the alleged irregularities in the concept and design of the project and check whether the money spent was justified.The inquiry by the greater NOIDA chairman will also put the lens on the loss incurred by the State exchequer as a result of intermittent change of specifications.The second aspect of the high level inquiry will encompass the justification of the project itself, its concept and the fiscal involvement in it.The release pointed out the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) being a constitutional and totally autonomous authority, keeping a strict vigil over the right use of government property was well within his jurisdiction.The terms of reference of the inquiry by the CAG will be: (a) The justification of total expenditure sanctioned for the project design and construction on works involved and whether the money spent is in excess to the sanctioned amount, (b) whether effecting changes in the size and format of the project was justified and also of escalation in the cost of project as a result of these changes, (c) the justification for the one time release of funds in excess of the expected expenditure incurred, (d) the justification of drawing money from the contingency fund for meeting the needs of the project budget, (e) financial approval of the project was taken as per prescribed rules, (f) whether prescribed procedure for estimating of the cost and approval of the estimate was taken recourse to, (g) the justification of spending huge sums of money considering the limited fiscal resources of the State, its priorities and other requirements.
