the Border Areas Development Programme (BADP) is designed to improve the infrastructure and living standards of villages near the state’s borders. However, a recent performance audit conducted by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India has raised serious concerns regarding the effectiveness and execution of the scheme.
The audit report, tabled in the Gujarat Assembly, reveals significant irregularities in the implementation of this high-priority programme.The audit focused on 328 works across 958 initiatives in 35 villages spanning three districts: Banaskantha, Kutch, and Patan. It found glaring discrepancies in the execution of the projects, which were meant to address fundamental needs such as road connectivity, water supply, and sanitation. One notable issue was the construction of a 1.5 km road to connect two villages that are already just 3.5 km apart. Another example was the setting up of reverse osmosis (RO) plants in areas where there is no water scarcity, while in other places, where water is scarce, the plants were either absent or inefficient. Furthermore, the approval of tube wells in areas with saline groundwater raised serious concerns about the sustainability of these interventions.
Perhaps most concerning was the construction of a hostel on private land located 35 km away from the nearest school, raising questions about the project’s planning and execution. Similarly, the programme’s public outreach efforts were carried out without any dedicated funding, undermining their effectiveness and outreach.The CAG also pointed out that despite being a scheme aimed at improving border areas, none of the 185 villages in Gujarat’s border zone (located within 10 km of the international boundary) had been “saturated” with basic amenities as per the guidelines. The saturation concept was meant to ensure that these villages had adequate facilities like roads, electricity, schools, and health services. Alarmingly, the definition of what constitutes a “saturated” village was not even decided until January 2023, despite the audit being conducted in 2022.
The report further highlighted that while strategic priority should have been given to villages identified by the Border Security Force (BSF), there were delays and gaps in involving the BSF’s inputs. It was only in April 2022 that the department managed to include the BSF’s suggestions for strategic village development. Additionally, district authorities failed to conduct a comprehensive needs analysis of the border villages, a step crucial for determining the gaps in physical and social infrastructure.
Another striking issue was the delay in the functioning of key committees. The District Level Committees (DLCs) in Banaskantha and Kutch did not hold meetings consistently, affecting the timely approval of projects. The State Level Steering Committee (SLSC) also failed to conduct several meetings in the five years under review. These delays ranged from 45 to 196 days, further exacerbating the inefficiency in the programme’s execution.
An instance of particularly poor planning was the construction of Centres of Excellence (CoEs) for hospitality and construction services, approved in 2018-19 with a budget of Rs 10.86 crore. However, the chosen land in Kutch was found to be unsuitable, and the land in Patan turned out to be forested, making it impossible to proceed as planned. The projects were eventually cancelled in 2022 after prolonged delays and confusion, highlighting the lack of foresight in executing such critical infrastructure.
This audit, which scrutinised the BADP for the period 2016-17 to 2021-22, reveals a pattern of mismanagement, poor planning, and systemic failures within the programme. The findings suggest that despite substantial financial investments, the intended outcomes of the BADP have been compromised, leaving the border areas in dire need of proper infrastructure and development. The report calls for a comprehensive overhaul of the programme’s implementation and monitoring mechanisms to ensure that the funds allocated are used effectively and that the intended beneficiaries — the people living in border areas — are truly uplifted by this critical initiative.
