Dimapur, July 30 : The directorate of Social Welfare has refuted a number of allegations against it leveled by a local organization concerning anomalies in the department, which included ‘deductions.’
The Social Welfare agency issued a press release on Saturday stating its contentions. The charges were stated to have been leveled by a local activist group, the Nagaland Public Rights Awareness Forum (NPRAAF) who allegedly found anomalies.
“No deductions in any form have been made at source by the department. And if any staffs are found indulging in such illegal practices the department will initiate disciplinary action against the erring officials / staff,” the reply from the department stated.
The press release was appended by the agency’s directorate.
The department also asserted that it had been ‘complying’ with requests for information: “Under the RTI Act every department is mandated to disclose information. The department has so far being complying. If there are such instances/ cases where disclosures has been denied individuals/ group may take up the (matter) with competent authority with supportive proof.”
Also, the directorate stated that registered nongovernmental organizations seeking grant-in-aid are verified through the District Welfare Offices. Based on the verifications, the press release stated,
the state-level selection committee for grant-in-aid recommends ‘their inclusion for receiving the GIA,’ the department stated.
‘Some registered nongovernmental organizations are maintaining multiple homes and if the state level selection committee finds them befitting and deserving of grant-in-aid then only the grant is provided to the nongovernmental organizations under multiple schemes.,’ it explained.
The ‘details’, according to the statement, are (given verbatim):
1. Ebenezer is maintaining a children Home as well as an Old Age Home in Dimapur.
2. Caring Neighbour Ministry is maintaining an Old Age Home in Mokokchung and a Children Home in Dimapur.
Further, the department clarified that for the implementation of any central or state program, 3% of the total project cost was permissible for ‘administrative expenditure.’
“Setting aside Rs.50, 000 for office expenses come up to only 1.1% of the total amount GIA released. Therefore, earmarking the amount for such expenses should not be issue. No GIA is withheld by the department and pending payments if any is due to the NGO's not coming forward to claim the GIA,” the Social Welfare authority stated.
The department also clarified that that the amount of Rs.5, 00,000 available under the State Plan during 2013-2014 was “primarily earmarked for prevention and rehabilitation of drug abuse not confining to voluntary organizations alone.”
Based on the recommendation of the National Commission for protection of Child Rights, the State Level Selection Committee had duly endorsed the recommendation made to an individual whose case was deserving and befitting, the press release stated.
“The department is of the view that withholding such relief to a deserving individual should be going against the moral ethics.”
