Unaccounted Collections
61% of drivers have responded that payment of 'additional' money to RTO staff continues to be
the same, post CICP. 14% have responded that they have to pay more money now giving an
average decline of 2.17, while 25% opine that CICP has resulted in an improvement by giving a
positive impact of 2.81. Overall, there is a positive shift of 0.39 in this dimension of processing
at the check post. The control group average works out to 3.33, which is slightly better than the
CICP average of 3.25. Possibly the drivers in the control group may be paying lesser additional
money, as compared to drivers passing through CICP – in the absence of accurate estimation of
weight of the trucks and other control procedures.
Almost all the drivers interviewed told the study team that an unofficial 'entry fee' of Rs. 20 to
Rs. 50 has to be paid by them irrespective of the weight of the goods being carried by them.
Once the Inspector does the weighing and penalty estimation process, the driver is given an
option to pay the 'official' or 'unofficial' sum of money (the former goes to the Government
treasuries and the latter gets unaccounted).
The table below summarizes the pattern of penalty collections at the surveyed computerized
check posts:
Penalty Amounts paid Given Receipt Unaccounted Collection
by drivers


N = 106
Over
Weight
Over
Dimension
Along with
OD or OW
penalties
In lieu of
OW or
OD

penalties
No. of Vehicles 54 (50%) 12 (11%) 15 (14%) 36 (33%)
Total Amount (Rs.) 61995 16225 570 4100
Average per vehicle (Rs) 1148 1352 38 114
It can be seen from the table that about 50% of the vehicles paid penalty for overloading and
11% of the vehicles paid penalty for over dimensioning. The average penalty per vehicle for
overloading is Rs.1148 and for over dimensioning is Rs.1352.
However, 33% of the vehicles although are either overloaded or over dimensioned, were not
charged official penalty and were let off by collecting an average of Rs.114 per vehicle, which
went unaccounted. Thus creating a clear leakage of government revenue to the extent of
Rs.1250*36 = 45,000 with a corruption amount of Rs.4, 100.
In addition to the above, unaccounted money of Rs.38 per vehicle was collected from 14% of the
vehicles, which were given official receipts for either overloading or over dimensioning. Thus
even with CICP, unaccounted money was collected from 47% of the vehicles passing through
the check post.
An interesting facet, on the use of the weigh- bridge, came into light, during the study. In the
traditional system, weighing was not an exact procedure, due to non-availability of weighbridges
at the check post. The inspectors used to stop only some suspect vehicles and estimate
the overload weight visually and by experience and collect penalty charges from them.
Page 15 of 42
With the introduction of the weighbridge, the exact weight is known for all vehicles. Neither
there is a locking mechanism (where once a vehicle gets weighed through the electronic weighbridge,
the system logs the transaction and does not permit non-payments for over loading)
existing nor is the monitoring mechanism in place. Thus, CICP has offered a greater opportunity
for 'leakage'. Inspectors now randomly bypass the system and collect a smaller 'unofficial'
amount in lieu of the large official penalty charges. Unwittingly, technology has become a useful
and perfect tool in the hands of the corrupt.
Possibly, introduction of suitable locking mechanisms and elimination of cash collection (by
using electronic means of payment like debit cards, etc.) at check posts may improve the
situation.
70% of the drivers complained that Inspectors habitually harass them (in spite of paying the due
amounts), sometimes even going to the extent of manhandling them.