# claims of government servants

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 20
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1958-01-17
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 20
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/claims-of-government-servants-162706
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

11
C.L. No. 20 dated 28th March, 1966
The following instructions should strictly be complied with in respect of personal
claims of government servants:-
1.
As required under para 74(a) of the Financial Handbook, Volume V, Part I,
claims of Rs. 5 or less which are less than a year old, having not been preferred
within six months of their becoming due, should be passed by the District Judges
themselves and thereafter sent with all the papers complete in all respects direct
to the Accountant General, U.P., Allahabad for investigation.
2.
As required under para 74(b) (1) of the Financial Handbook, Volume V, part I,
claims which are more than a year old but less than three years old should be
submitted by the District Judges direct to the Court for orders for their
investigation by the Accountant General, U.P., Allahabad. Such claims should not
be submitted direct to the Accountant General, U.P., Allahabad by the District
Judges. Under the aforesaid provision, order for investigation of the claim can
only be made by the Head of the Department.
3.
As required under para 74(b) (ii) and (iii) of the Financial Handbook, Volume V,
part I, claims which are more than three years old should also be sent to the Court
for onward submission to the Government for the orders for investigation by the
Accountant General, U.P., Allahabad. The practice of sending such claims direct
to the Government must be put a stop to.
4.
(a)
As required under the Court's circular letter No.8/VIII-f-23, dated January
17, 1958, causes of delay in preferring the claim should invariably be given along
with the claim itself.
(b)
As required under C.L. No. 30/VC-75, dated March 30, 1951, it is also
necessary that all such claims under para 74, Financial Handbook, Volume V,
Part I, should be looked into and taken up with as little delay as possible.
5.
In case of there being a claim constituted of several parts, it should be split up
into various parts according to the period covered, and then each part dealt with
suitably in accordance with the aforesaid rules. For example, if there is a claim,
part of which is less than a year old and part of which is more than a year old, but
less than three years old the District Judge should pass orders himself, about the
part which is less than a year old and send it direct to the Accountant General,
and that part of the claim which is more than a year old but less than three years
old, be submitted to the Court for orders for being investigation by the
Accountant General.
6.
Petty claims not exceeding Rs. 5/- should be avoided if they do not affect the
pension of the claimant under rule 74(b) (IV) of the Financial Handbook, Volume
v, part I.
7.
Munsarim of the District Judge and the Munsarim of Additional District Judges
not at headquarters shall check up once every three months with a view to see that
claims of this nature, which have accumulated in the meantime are put up before
the District Judge/Additional District Judges not at headquarters for proper
orders.
12
12.
AUDIT REPORT
C.L. No. 14/xb-11 dated 31st January, 1958
The delay in the finalization of the audit inspection reports is due, mainly, to the
fact that the District Judges do not take prompt action on the audit objection so as to be
able to give final replies to them in the annotated copies themselves. Even objections
relating to small recoveries are not replied to finally and in detail. In most cases the
Office of the Accountant General, Uttar Pradesh, closes the objections if the replies of
the heads of offices are final and the heads of departments find them satisfactory and
recommend closure of the objections. Since the replies in most cases are not final, the
Court too is unable to give categorical and final comments thereon.

District Judges should, therefore, ensure that the final replies to as many audit
objections as possible are furnished in annotated Copies so that the Court may ensure
that there is sufficient justification for not sending the final replies, in the first instance
on the annotated copies.
C.L. No. 48/X-b-11 dated 14th June, 1965 read with
Government Letter No. B-1-905/X-54, 1964 dated 20th March, 1965
To avoid financial irregularities regularly pointed out in audit reports the
instructions contained in the Budget Manual and general orders issued by the Vitta
Vibhag from time to time should strictly be observed.
C.L. No. 84/X-b-11 dated 8th October, 1968
Instruction contained in G.O. no. 8(3)/68-Nyaya (Ka-II) Vibhag, dated June 28,
1968 and 3037/VII-(Ka-I)-133/66 dated August 26, 1968 should be strictly complied
with so that in future there may not be any delay in settlement of the audit objection.
C.L. No. 45/X-b-11 dated 23rd April, 1969
In order to avoid delay in settlement of the audit objections relating to the
judgeships concerned the District Judges should see that the instructions contained in
G.O. no. 10/1/4/68, dated October 31, 1968 are strictly complied with.
C.L. No. 50/X-b-11 dated 8th May, 1968
The revised procedure as contained in Government Endorsement no. 8(2)/68Nyaya (Ka-II) Vibhag, dated April 1, 1968 regarding Audit Inspection Reports may be
strictly complied with and audit objection should be attended to promptly.
C.L. No. 77/VIII-b-104 dated 20th May, 1971
For simplification in the procedure of accounts and audit of Revenue, Civil and
Criminal Court Deposits, directions contained in Accountant General's Circular Letter
no. Deposit I/Lx. 11/1420, dated December 14/18, 1970, should be strictly followed.
13.
AUDITS BY COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL FOR THE
REVENUE REALISED ON DATED COURT-FEE AND ON SUITS
VALUATION
C.L. No. 6/VIIF-26/Admn. (G), dated January 9, 1992