Delhi: CAG report on construction workers board flags irregularities

The audit, covering 2019-20 to 2022-23, examined records from the Labour Department, the Welfare Board, and the Directorate of Industrial Safety and Health

Delhi chief minister Rekha Gupta on Monday tabled the Comptroller and Auditor General’s (CAG) performance audit report on the welfare of construction workers in the city, highlighting significant irregularities in cess collection, data maintenance, and welfare implementation by the Delhi Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board.

Delhi chief minister Rekha Gupta on Monday. (HT Photo)

The report, titled Performance Audit on Welfare of Building and Other Construction Workers for the year ended March 31, 2023, revealed that while the board had collected ₹3,579.05 crore in construction cess as of March 2023, there was an unaccounted gap of ₹204.95 crore between the cess figures recorded by district authorities and those maintained by the board over the last four years.

Under the Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996, a 1% cess is mandated on the cost of construction projects, which must be remitted to the state welfare board. The audit found discrepancies between the records of cess collectors, district offices, and the board. “The difference in figures of the cess as per District records and as per the Board for four years amounted to ₹204.95 crore. The differences were not found reconciled,” the report stated.

The report noted that the board had not organised any training programs for workers or their dependents after 2019-20, when only a one-time session was held for 350 people. It also flagged serious issues with worker registration data. While the board claimed 696,000 registered workers, complete records were available for only 198,000.

Further scrutiny of the database revealed inconsistencies, the report stated, with 119,000 beneficiaries linked to 238,000 images, indicating possible duplication or errors in identity verification. The audit said the absence of accurate data hindered the delivery of welfare benefits and questioned the credibility of the board’s records.