Missing CSR Audit

Corporate Social Responsibility is not charity. It is a statutory obligation intended to ensure that communities hosting major infrastructure projects share in the benefits of development. In remote regions where hydroelectric projects come up, CSR assumes even greater significance because it often delivers facilities that Governments struggle to provide with the required speed and consistency. Ambulances, schools, public toilets, healthcare infrastructure, drinking water schemes and community assets are not mere entries in expenditure statements; for many isolated villages they are life-changing interventions. That is precisely why the reported omission of an independent audit for CSR expenditure running into crores is deeply disturbing. Such a vast sum is certainly not insignificant, particularly when a substantial contribution has come from the Dul Hasti Project. These funds are meant to extend the fruits of development to the people who bear the environmental and social costs of large infrastructure projects. Every rupee spent must therefore withstand the highest standards of scrutiny.

In many remote areas, CSR-funded facilities are nothing short of a lifeline. A functioning ambulance can save lives where hospitals are hours away. A school building can transform educational opportunities for generations. Medical facilities and sanitation projects improve both public health and quality of life. For communities that have long remained deprived of basic amenities, these initiatives are often viewed as a blessing. Their importance cannot be overstated. Yet, without an independent audit, there is no credible mechanism to establish whether the intended benefits have actually reached the beneficiaries. Were the assets created as claimed? Are they functional? Did the expenditure translate into measurable improvements on the ground, or does it exist only in official records? These are not rhetorical questions. They go to the heart of public accountability.

The absence of an independent audit raises an equally troubling question: why was the prescribed procedure not followed despite the magnitude of the expenditure? Established SOPs exist precisely to prevent such gaps in oversight. Any deviation from them weakens institutional credibility and undermines public confidence. It is a serious lapse that demands immediate attention. This concern assumes even greater importance against the backdrop of recurring allegations of favouritism in various ongoing projects. Corrective action must therefore proceed without delay and strictly in accordance with established procedures. With infrastructure projects worth thousands of crores currently under execution, there can be no room for bypassing systems designed to ensure accountability. Development and transparency must advance together.