Odisha's forest and environment department is under fire after a special audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) revealed the alleged misuse of ₹17 crore from the State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF) to purchase and customise Mahindra Thar SUVs, sidestepping central guidelines.
Key Points
- Odisha's forest and environment department allegedly misused ₹17 crore from the State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF) to procure and customise Mahindra Thar SUVs for forest protection.
- The funds, sanctioned under the 'preparedness and capacity building' component of the SDRF, were improperly used for vehicle purchases, which fall outside permissible expenditure.
- The audit highlighted that the Special Relief Commissioner (SRC) was not the competent authority to approve such expenditure, requiring recommendations from the State Disaster Management Authority (SDMA) and approval from the State Executive Committee (SEC).
- Concerns were raised about the procedural propriety as the funds were reportedly transferred to a departmental savings bank account of the PCCF (wildlife), contrary to existing rules.
- The forest department had surrendered ₹338 crore during the same period, which could have been re-appropriated for vehicle purchases instead of diverting SDRF funds.
A special audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has found Odisha's forest and environment department sidestepped guidelines of the Centre in expenditure from the State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF), and procured Mahindra Thar sport utility vehicles (SUVs) from the fund, customising the vehicles for forest protection.
According to the audit findings reviewed by Business Standard, the procurement and modification of the vehicles cost ₹17 crore in 2024-25. The vehicles were procured for monitoring and regular patrolling in non-motorable roads within forests.
Audit Findings on Fund Misuse
The audit found that the Special Relief Commissioner (SRC) had sanctioned ₹28.45 crore in July 2024 for the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF) (wildlife), ostensibly under the "preparedness and capacity building" component of the SDRF. "The funds were meant for capacity building but were used to purchase Thar jeeps for forest protection."
In December last year, the state government had ordered a special audit of the office of the PCCF (wildlife) by a team of the Principal Accountant General (accounts and entitlements), Odisha, which comes under the CAG, with special emphasis on vehicle procurement and customisation following allegations.
While scrutinising the transactions related to SDRF utilisation, the audit observed the funds available under the "preparedness and capacity building" component should not be used for establishment-related expenditure such as salaries, office expenses, or other routine administrative costs.
"The purchase of vehicles for departmental use does not fall within the permissible ambit of expenditure under this window. Of the sanctioned ₹28.45 crore, total procurement plus modification of the SUVs cost ₹17 crore. What happened to the remaining amount is not known," stated the letter from the Principal Accountant General to Odisha Chief Secretary Anu Garg.
Procedural Lapses and Financial Irregularities
The audit said the SRC was not the competent authority to approve such expenditure. For any expenditure under the "preparedness and capacity building" component, for items permissible, the recommendation of the State Disaster Management Authority (SDMA) is required along with approval from the State Executive Committee (SEC), headed by the chief secretary.
The audit also said the sanction order issued by the forest and environment department in September 2024 described the expenditure as "Central Government Contribution to Reserve Fund", which is incorrect and misleading. "The bill was similarly presented before the treasury under the same head, which resulted in misclassification and distortion of facts.
The amount has reportedly been transferred to the HDFC savings bank account of the PCCF (wildlife), which raises serious concerns about procedural propriety and compliance. The manner in which the SDRF funds were credited to a departmental savings bank account is not as per extant rules," it stated.
During the same period, the audit found, the forest department surrendered ₹338 crore, which could have been re-appropriated, in accordance with applicable financial rules, for the purchase of vehicles, instead of diverting SDRF funds.
