Page 12 - Microsoft PowerPoint - FAQ's E-booklet format combined_20_11_2020.pptx

As per Para 6 (iii) of Ministry of Finance letter no. F.No. 40(06)/PF-S/2017-18/Vol.v,
dated 17.05.2020, States are required to implement computerized Central Random
Inspection System? wherein the same inspector is not assigned to the same unit in
‘subsequent years’, whereas, as per the State Reforms Action Plan- 2020, States/
UTs are required to mandate that the same inspector will not inspect the same
establishment ‘twice consecutively’. Which feature between the two, is required to
be implemented by the States/ UTs?
States are requested to refer State Reforms Action Plan- 2020 shared by DPIIT on 25th
Aug 2020, which provides that the same inspector will not inspect the same
establishment ‘twice consecutively’. Please note that this would also suffice the
requirement mentioned by Ministry of Finance.

As per the sub point (iii) of the Reform No. 206, States/ UTs are required to
mandate that the same inspector will not inspect the same establishment
twice consecutively. What can be the alternative options to implement the
reform in case there are limited number of Inspectors in the State/ UT?
States/ UTs may allow third-party inspections and introduce a provision for self-
certification for the low & medium risk units and inspections based on their past
records (such as frequency of defaults, consistency in the compliance) and encourage
industries to opt for these provisions. This will lessen the burden on departmental
inspectors. Alternatively, States/ UTs may recruit required inspectors to meet the
reform requirement.

As the inspection for Stamping of weights and measures under Legal Metrology
Act, 2009 involves numerous industries and small traders, undertaking the
verifications through CIS is difficult to implement owing to the fact that sub-point
(iii) of Reform No. 206 mandates that the same inspector should not inspect
same establishment twice consecutively. How can States/ UTs overcome this
challenge to implement the reform?
States/ UTs may allow third-party inspections and introduce a provision for self-
certification for the low & medium risk units and inspections based on their past
records (such as frequency of defaults, consistency in the compliance) under the Legal
Metrology Act, 2009 and encourage industries/ traders to opting for these provisions.
This will lessen the burden on departmental inspectors.
Alternatively, States/ UTs may recruit required inspectors to meet the reform
requirement

10 Page 13