Procurement, recruitment of teachers at Sanothimi Campus were done without following Tribhuvan University rules, Vigilance Centre saysThe Centre had conducted an investigation after it received a complaint about several alleged irregularities at the Campus.
Sanothimi Campus failed to abide by the Financial Management and Procurement Rule of the Tribhuvan University while procuring mobile phones, water purification machines and sports items and publishing a memorial book, an investigation by the National Vigilance Centre has revealed.
The Centre had conducted an investigation after it received a complaint about several alleged irregularities at the Campus. The Centre gave a clean chit to a number of alleged irregularities, including the contract for an under-construction building. However, it did find that some activities at the Campus were done without following due procedures.
The Campus did not follow rule 58 of the Financial Management and Procurement Rule of Tribhuvan University while procuring a Rs 100,005 purification machine from Aryan Technology. As per the rule, a sealed quotation should be called and the best option from among at least three short-listed firms should be chosen before the procurement of anything above Rs25,000.
As per the Tribhuvan University Executive Council meeting on February 22, 2017, the Campus chief can purchase a mobile phone worth up to Rs15,000. But the Campus procured an iPhone-8 worth Rs 119,780 for its Chief Ram Chandra Ghimire. As it is a procurement made by crossing the limit set by the Tribhuvan University Executive Council, the Office of the Auditor-General has categorised it as an irregularity.
In the complaint, the current officiating Campus Chief Homnath Dahal was accused of financial irregularities worth Rs1 million by submitting fake bills as per the instructions of the Campus Chief Ghimire.
The Campus Chief was also accused of taking payments from the Public Service Commission for letting the latter conduct exams on the campus. The Centre’s investigation found that Rs34,560 paid by the Commission to the Campus in the previous two years was deposited in the Campus’s account only after a complaint was registered at the Centre.
The Centre found that under the leadership of Dahal, the campus had purchased sports equipment, but it was not worth the billed amount of Rs1 million. Dahal had received a reimbursement for spending Rs253,210 to run various sporting events. The Campus was supposed to prepare a proposal before holding sporting events, but it was found to have ignored this procedure. Although an expense of Rs68,170 was categorized under tiffin expenditure, no names were forthcoming as for whom the tiffins had been prepared.
The necessary process as defined by the Financial Management and Procurement Rule was not followed while making a payment of Rs286,737 to Shree Nepal Mega Printing House Private Limited for the publication of a memorial book published by the Free Student Union.
The Campus administration on May 30 last year appointed three teachers— one for teaching mathematics and two for teaching English—on contract. The complaint stated that the appointments were made without following the Tribhuvan University’s rules. After the investigation, the Centre said the Campus had failed to take prior approval from the Office of the Registrar at the Tribhuvan University as required.
Another complaint registered against the Campus leadership was that two teachers appointed on a contract basis were allowed to lead various departments, going against the Tribhuvan University Organization and Educational Administration Rules. The investigation by the Centre found the appointments go against Rule 19 (2) and (3).
In its recommendation, the vigilance Centre suggested action against those who made procurement decisions going against the rules and those who made the recruitment of teachers on a contract basis without taking approval from the Office of the Registrar, Tribhuvan University. But the Centre recommended suspending further investigation in the case and warned the Campus administration of further action if it is not found following due procedures in the future.
The Campus chief was accused of making payment of a bill to a contractor after the completion of work on an under-construction multi-purpose building. The chief had not taken the approval of the procurement committee of the campus before making the payment.