The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is one of India’s most potent and respected parliamentary committees. Established in 1921, it has been critical in upholding transparency and financial discipline in government functioning for a century.

By examining how public funds are utilized and reviewing audit reports prepared by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), the PAC ensures that the executive remains accountable to the legislature, strengthening India’s democratic system.

A clear understanding of the PAC is essential for UPSC Mains aspirants, especially in General Studies Paper 2 (GS Paper 2), which covers the topics “Parliament and State Legislatures” and “Governance.”

It showcases how institutional mechanisms check executive overreach, ensure good governance, and enhance public trust. PAC frequently appears in UPSC questions, making it a must-know topic given its evolving relevance to contemporary issues such as reviews of government schemes and fiscal mismanagement.

PAC’s centenary in 2021 marks not just a historic milestone but also reflects the committee’s enduring relevance in monitoring public expenditure, suggesting reforms, and ensuring that public money is spent efficiently, lawfully, and for the intended purpose.

Historical Background

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) traces its roots to the Government of India Act 1919, also known as the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms, which aimed to introduce more accountability in colonial governance.

This Act marked the first official recognition of the need for legislative oversight of public finances, leading to the formal establishment of the PAC in 1921 under British rule. It was created to audit government expenditures and ensure that funds approved by the legislature were used lawfully and efficiently.

Initially chaired by W.M. Hailey, the committee had its first Indian Chairperson, Bhupendra Nath Mitra, symbolizing a gradual transfer of fiscal oversight responsibilities to Indian leadership during the colonial period.

Over the decades, the PAC has evolved from a colonial oversight tool into a pillar of democratic accountability, holding the executive accountable for financial decisions and irregularities in independent India.

Composition of PAC

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) comprises 22 members, reflecting a cross-section of parliamentary representation. Specifically, 15 members are elected from the Lok Sabha by the Speaker, and seven members are elected from the Rajya Sabha (the upper House) by the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha.

This House representation ensures that the PAC reflects a broad and balanced legislative perspective.

Each member serves one year, after which the committee is reconstituted. Despite the short tenure, the PAC maintains institutional continuity and expertise through reappointments and support from the secretariat and CAG audits.

The Speaker appoints the Chairperson of the PACs, a convention that has been followed since 1967; this position is usually given to an opposition party member. This practice reinforces nonpartisan scrutiny and enhances parliamentary checks and balances, making the committee more credible and independent.

Importantly, Ministers are barred from being members of the PAC. This rule ensures that the executive branch does not interfere in legislative oversight, thereby maintaining the committee’s neutrality and integrity in auditing government finances.

Legal and Constitutional Authority

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) derives its authority from the Indian Constitution and the Parliamentary Rules of Procedure. Two key constitutional provisions support its functioning:

• Article 105 of the Constitution grants parliamentary privileges to Members of Parliament, including the freedom to speak and act without external interference during parliamentary proceedings. This ensures that PAC members can scrutinize government finances independently and without fear of reprisal.
• Article 118 empowers each House of Parliament to make its own rules for regulating its procedure and conduct of business. Using this provision, the Lok Sabha has formulated specific rules (notably Rule 308) to constitute and regulate the PAC annually.

Beyond the Constitution, the PAC operates within the framework of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Parliament, which clearly outline its composition, powers, procedures, and reporting mechanisms. These rules give the PAC the institutional legitimacy and procedural structure to function effectively as a financial watchdog.

These constitutional and procedural foundations ensure that the PAC operates with legal authority, independence, and continuity, enabling it to uphold financial accountability in governance.

Key Functions and Responsibilities

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) serves as a critical oversight mechanism in the Indian parliamentary system, ensuring that public funds are used efficiently, lawfully, and for their intended purpose. Its core functions and responsibilities include the following:

• Examination of Accounts: The PAC thoroughly examines the Finance Accounts and Appropriation Accounts of the Government of India. This involves verifying whether the funds granted by Parliament have been spent according to the approved purposes and within the authorized limits.
• Scrutiny of CAG Reports: One of PAC’s most essential roles is analyzing the audit reports submitted by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG). These reports include audits of government departments, public sector undertakings, and autonomous bodies. The PAC scrutinizes these findings to detect inefficiencies, lapses, or deviations in financial management.
• Investigation of Irregularities: The PAC investigates financial irregularities, overspending, misappropriation, and misuse of public funds. It assesses whether any department or ministry has violated Parliament’s financial discipline.
• Advisory Recommendations: The Advisory Committee submits recommendations to Parliament and the concerned ministries. While based on its findings, these recommendations are not binding, they influence policy corrections and reforms and aim to improve government departments’ transparency, accountability, and fiscal discipline.

In essence, the PAC functions as Parliament’s financial conscience, helping to strengthen democratic governance by ensuring that the executive remains answerable for its use of public money.

Role in Strengthening Governance

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is foundational in strengthening democratic governance in India by ensuring that the government is answerable for how it spends taxpayer money. Its contributions go beyond technical auditing—they directly support good governance in the following ways:

• Ensures Financial Discipline Across Ministries: By regularly examining how funds are spent and highlighting cases of overspending, misuse, or inefficiency, the PAC acts as a deterrent against financial mismanagement. Ministries and departments are likelier to follow budgetary rules and adopt responsible fiscal practices, knowing their expenditures will be scrutinized.
• Promotes Transparency, Efficiency, and Accountability: The PAC reveals irregularities and inefficiencies through its CAG reports and public accounts reviews. This not only improves the efficiency of public administration but also upholds the principles of accountability and transparency, which are pillars of a responsive and ethical government.
• Builds Public Trust and Enhances Parliamentary Oversight: When the PAC exposes financial lapses and pushes for corrective actions, it reinforces the idea that public institutions are working in the interest of citizens. This enhances Parliament’s credibility as a watchdog and strengthens public confidence in democratic processes.

Significance of PAC

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is of exceptional importance to India’s parliamentary system and is often called “the Mother of all Parliamentary Committees.” This title reflects its historical legacy, broad mandate, and critical role in ensuring financial accountability.

• Role as a Watchdog Over Executive Actions: The PAC is primarily tasked with ensuring that the executive spends public funds with Parliament’s approval. It scrutinizes government financial behavior and flags any irregularities, overspending, or violations, making it one of the most powerful accountability mechanisms within the legislature.
• Larger Ambit than Departmental Committees: Unlike other Departmental Standing Committees limited to specific ministries, the PAC can examine various financial matters across all departments. This broader jurisdiction allows it to comprehensively evaluate the government’s fiscal discipline and public resource utilization.
• Builds Nonpartisan Consensus: One of PAC’s unique strengths is its ability to function beyond party lines. Its closed-door meetings encourage constructive dialogue, enabling members from different political backgrounds to collaborate and adopt reports by consensus rather than confrontation. This collaborative approach enhances the neutrality and credibility of its findings.

In essence, the PAC is a cornerstone of parliamentary democracy in India. Its work ensures proper checks on executive power. It contributes to stronger, more transparent governance, making it highly significant for the functioning of Parliament and the public’s confidence in democratic institutions.

Recent Interventions by PAC

In recent years, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has become increasingly proactive in addressing systemic inefficiencies and lapses in governance by expanding its scope of performance audits beyond traditional financial scrutiny. These interventions demonstrate their evolving and dynamic role in contemporary governance oversight:

• Roleicism of Swadesh Darshan Scheme: The PAC sharply criticized the Ministry of Tourism for the poor implementation of the Swadesh Darshan Scheme, which was launched to develop thematic tourist circuits across India. The committee highlighted delays, fund mismanagement, and inadequate outcomes, underscoring the gap between allocated funds and actual on-ground development.
• Review of Toll Collection & Highway Amenities: The PAC raised concerns over excessive toll collection on national highways and the failure of toll operators to provide promised amenities such as rest areas, clean washrooms, and medical facilities. These findings exposed weaknesses in enforcement and accountability within public-private infrastructure contracts.
• Selection of 160 Subjects for Performance Review: During its recent term, the PAC demonstrated its broadening oversight capacity by selecting 160 subjects for review. These included areas such as tariffs on public infrastructure, regulatory compliance, efficiency of welfare schemes, and financial discipline across departments.

These interventions reflect PAC’s growing assertiveness and relevance in ensuring that government programs and regulatory frameworks are financially sound, functional, practical, and citizen-centric. They mark a shift toward outcome-based auditing, a critical step for transparent governance in a complex and expanding public sector.

Limitations of PAC

While the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is vital in promoting financial accountability, its institutional powers are limited, affecting its overall impact and enforceability. These limitations are essential for understanding the practical constraints within which the PAC operates:

• Advisory RoRolenly – Cannot Enforce or Penalize: The Role reviews, scrutinizes, and recommends; it has no executive or judicial powers to enforce its findings. It cannot impose penalties, direct corrective action, or compel compliance. This restricts its authority to mere recommendations.
• No Power Over Policy Decisions—Restricted to Expenditure Review: PACAC’s mandate is limited strictly to examining how money is spent, not why it is paid. This means it cannot question the merits of policy decisions taken by the government, even if the policy leads to wasteful or inefficient spending.
• Recommendations Not Binding on the Government: Even when the PAC makes well-reasoned and evidence-backed recommendations, the government has no legal obligation to implement them. Ministries may acknowledge the findings but ignore or delay action, limiting the committee’s practical influence.
• Often Ignored in Legislative Decision-Making in Majority-Led Houses: In situations where the ruling party holds a brute majority in the Lok Sabha, PAC recommendations and calls for scrutiny are often sidelined or diluted. Political dominance can reduce the effectiveness of parliamentary committees, mainly when the executive drives legislative priorities.

In summary, while the PAC symbolizes parliamentary oversight, its lack of binding powers, limited scope, and political marginalization often hamper its ability to drive systemic change. Strengthening its authority and ensuring greater responsiveness from the executive are key steps needed to enhance its effectiveness.

Importance of Parliamentary Committees

Parliamentary Committees, named the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), are essential tools in a functioning democracy. They enable Parliament to work more effectively by handling complex and technical matters in detail, which is often impossible in full-house debates. Their importance can be explained through the following dimensions:

• Brings in Technical Expertise: Committees provide a platform where Members of Parliament can engage with subject-matter experts, auditors (like the CAG), and senior bureaucrats. This access to specialized knowledge enhances the quality and depth of deliberations, particularly on financial, regulatory, or policy matters.
• Encourages In-Depth, Apolitical Analysis: Unlike parliamentary sessions, which are often politically charged and time-bound, committee meetings are typically held behind closed doors. This setting allows MPs from different parties to engage in serious, fact-based discussions, helping to foster nonpartisan consensus on essential issues.
• Ensures Quality Legislation and Oversight: Committees thoroughly scrutinize bills, government reports, and schemes, which improves the quality of legislation and financial accountability. By highlighting gaps or recommending amendments, they play a crucial role in fine-tuning laws and policies before implementation.
• Helps Bridge Executive–Legislative Gap: Committees aclinkarliament (legislature) and the government (executive While the executive proposes and implements policies, committees like the PAC ensure these actions are monitored, evaluated, and held accountable.

In summary, parliamentary committees strengthen democratic functioning by enhancing oversight, encouraging collaboration, and improving the effectiveness of governance through informed and focused scrutiny.

Issues Due to Non-Involvement of Committees

The non-involvement or bypassing of parliamentary committees, especially in crucial legislative and financial matters, seriously threatens the effectiveness and integrity of India’s parliamentary democracy. When laws and policies are passed without proper committee scrutiny, several critical issues arise:

• Weakens Parliamentary Democracy: In a proper parliamentary system, the legislature is expected to check on the executive. Skipping committee reviews undermines this foundational principle, reducing Parliament’s role to merely endorsing executive decisions instead of scrutinizing or shaping them.
• Limits Legislative Scrutiny: Parliamentary committees provide the platform for detailed examination of bills, budgets, and government actions. When they are sidelined, legislation is often debated superficially in the House, leading to inadequate analysis of long-term implications.
• Risks Rushed and Poorly Vetted Laws: Without committee oversight, bills may be introduced, debated, and passed hastily, without consultation with experts or stakeholders. This increases the risk of enacting flawed or poorly drafted laws, which may face implementation challenges or legal setbacks later.
• Favors Majoritarian Control, Bypassing Institutional Checks: In majority-led houses, the government fast-tracks legislation without engaging with committees, allowing it to bypass critical institutional checks. This trend promotes a centralized and unilateral decision-making style, weakening Parliament’s deliberative and consensus-building role.

In essence, committee involvement promotes accountability, depth, and democratic legitimacy. Its absence not only dilutes Parliament’s role but also endangers the quality and credibility of governance in India.

Way Forward

Several critical reforms must be considered to enhance the effectiveness and credibility of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and other parliamentary committees. These steps aim to strengthen democratic accountability, improve policy oversight, and ensure better outcomes in governance:

• Make Committee Referrals Mandatory for Key Bills: One of the most impactful reforms would be to institutionalize the referral of essential bills to relevant committees for detailed scrutiny. This would prevent rushed lawmaking, ensure technical vetting, and enhance the quality of legislation by incorporating expert input and stakeholder consultation.
• Strengthen Institutional Independence and Follow-Up on Recommendations: A PAC’s impact often depends on how seriously its recommendations are taken. Mechanisms must be established to track the implementation status of these recommendations, with ministries required to provide regular updates. Moreover, the PAC should be allowed greater independence from political interference in selecting subjects and finalizing reports.
• Increase Public Accessibility to PAC Findings: Transparency can be improved by making PAC reports more accessible to the public through easy-to-navigate digital platforms.
• Empower PAC with Quasi-Judicial Authority or Ensure Better Enforcement: While retaining its parliamentary nature, the PAC could be given quasi-judicial powers such as compelling evidence, summoning top officials with consequences for non-compliance, or mandating time-bound government responses. Alternatively, enforceable frameworks could be developed to ensure mandatory action on serious financial violations that it uncovers.

In conclusion, revitalizing the PAC through structural and procedural reforms will strengthen legislative oversight, restore public confidence in democratic institutions, and promote more accountable and transparent governance in India.

Conclusion

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is a pillar of accountability and transparency in India’s governance system. Through its rigorous scrutiny of government expenditures and CAG audit reports, the PAC ensures that public funds are used lawfully, efficiently, and as intended by Parliament. This acts as a vital check on executive power, reinforcing democratic principles.

India’s parliamentary framework should not be overstated. The PAC contributes to clean governance, better policy implementation, and enhanced public trust by holding the executive accountable and publicizing financial irregularities.

For UPSC Mains 2025 aspirants, understanding the PAC is essential for GS Paper 2 (Polity and Governance) and crucial for writing enriched, analytical answers on parliamentary control mechanisms, institutional checks and balances, and good governance practices. India’s oldest and most authoritative parliamentary committee, the PAC, remains a cornerstone of responsible democratic governance and a must-know topic for serious civil service contenders.

Public Accounts Committee (PAC): A Must-Know Topic for UPSC Mains 2025 – FAQs

When Was The PAC Established?

The PAC was formally established in 1921 following the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms introduced by the Government of India Act 1919.

Why Is The PAC called “the Mother of All Parliamentary Committees”?

It is called “The Mother of all Parliamentary Committees” because it was the first and most significant committee established to ensure executive accountability in financial matters.

What Is The Composition Of The PAC?

The PAC comprises 22 members—15 from the Lok Sabha and seven from the Rajya Sabha—elected annually.

Are Ministers Allowed To Be Members Of The PAC?

No, sitting ministers are not eligible to become members of the Public Accounts Committee.

What Are The Core Functions Of The PAC?

The PAC examines Finance and Appropriation Accounts, scrutinizes CAG reports, investigates financial irregularities, and recommends better economic governance.

What Kind Of Reports Does The PAC Review?

The PAC reviews audit reports prepared by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, including those on government departments, autonomous bodies, and public undertakings.

Are PAC’s Recommendations Binding On The Government?

PAC’s recommendations are advisory and not legally binding on the government. The PAC Review Policy Decisions?

No, the PAC is restricted to reviewing financial execution and has no authority to question the merits of government policy decisions.

How Does The PAC Strengthen Parliamentary Democracy?

The PAC enhances Parliament’s oversight function by ensuring financial discipline, promoting transparency, and holding the executive accountable.

What Are Some Recent Interventions By The PAC?

The PAC has recently reviewed the Swadesh Darshan Scheme, highway toll collection practices, and performance audits of regulatory bodies like SEBI and TRAI.

What Is The Tenure Of PAC Members?

Members of the PAC serve for a term of one year and may be reappointed.

Why Is The PAC Important For UPSC Mains Preparation?

Understanding the PAC is crucial for GS Paper 2, which covers topics such as Parliamentary Committees, Financial Accountability, and Governance.

How Does The PAC Promote Nonpartisan Deliberation?

The PAC encourages consensus-building across political lines through closed-door meetings, reducing partisan influence on its findings.

What Are The Limitations Of The PAC?

The PAC cannot enforce its recommendations or review policies and is often sidelined by majority-led legislatures.

How Can The Effectiveness Of The PAC Be Improved?

Suggested reforms include making committee referrals mandatory, strengthening follow-up mechanisms, enhancing transparency, and giving it quasi-judicial powers.

How Does The PAC Compare To Other Parliamentary Committees?

The PAC has a broader mandate than departmental standing committees, as it examines financial matters across all ministries and departments.

How Does The PAC Enhance Public Trust?

By exposing misuse of funds and suggesting corrective actions, the PAC builds citizen confidence in the integrity of governance.