CONTENTS - Central Public Works Department

328 SECTION 55
55.13 Written minutes of important meetings where decisions are taken
(1) The Public Accounts Committee has urged strict observance of the requirements of para 36(3) of
the Central Secretariat Manual of Office Procedure (Eighth Edition).
(2) The above para envisages that whenever an inter-departmental meeting is convened, an agenda
setting up clearly the points for discussion should be prepared and circulated in advance to the
Department concerned, and a record of the discussion should be prepared immediately after the
meeting and circulated to the other Departments concerned, setting the conclusions reached and
indicating the Departments responsible for taking further action on each conclusion. A proper
observance of this procedure would help to ensure prompt and effective action on the points
which ought to be decided through inter-departmental discussion.
(3) Subordinate officers are expected to exercise the powers vested in them. Serious notice would be
taken in cases where responsibility is shirked by senior officers.
55.14 Procedure for obtaining legal advice
(1) The Public Accounts Committee have commented on a case involving the procedure for obtaining
legal advice from the Ministry of Law, where the following unsatisfactory features were noticed:
(i) A second reference was made to the Ministry of Law on the point on which their opinion had
been obtained earlier without mentioning the earlier opinion given by them. Further, the second
opinion, which ran counter to the earlier opinion, was given at a lower level.
(ii) The normal practice of giving Audit an opportunity to present their views before a revised
opinion is obtained from the Ministry of Law in cases arising out of Audit objection was not
followed.
(2) The Committee have accordingly made the following recommendations:
“There is another point the Committee would like to mention. The Board had in this case made a
reference to the Ministry of Law for a second opinion without any mention of the earlier opinion
given by that Ministry. This the Committee considers wrong in principle. Besides the second
opinion, which ran counter to the first opinion, was from an Assistant Legal Adviser, while the first
opinion was given by a Deputy Legal Adviser. The Committee would like to impress on Government
the need to ensure that, where a second legal opinion is sought, it should specifically be sought
from an official of a status higher than the official who gave the first opinion. In respect of matters
included in the Audit Report, which are likely to come up before the Committee, it should also be
ensured that Audit are given an opportunity to present their point of view before an opinion is
sought from the Ministry of Law, and are associated with any inter-Ministerial deliberation that
might take place in this connection”.
(3) In cases where a second legal opinion is sought on matters arising out of the Audit objection, Audit
should invariably be kept informed and given opportunity to present their points of view.