Hindu Administrative Institutions c9.s5.36

c9.s5.36

In these cases the officials involved were the treasurer (*nidhāyaka*), the prescriber (*nibandhaka*), the receiver (*pratigrāhaka*), the payer (*dāyaka*), the middleman (*dāpaka*) and the menial servants. That person who was responsible for the offence was to be punished according to the nature of the crime committed. Informants who succeeded in proving the charge were to be rewarded and those who failed in establishing their position were liable to punishment for having cast reflection on the innocent.¹ The punishment varied according to the gravity of the guilt. Small guilt was always attended by the king's pardon. But clever and intelligent accountants were always rewarded with titles and honours in the court.² Another feature of the *Kauṭalīyan* finance is the grant of travelling allowances for servants going on state business. There is a practical illustration of this in the *Rāmāyaṇa* where Vasiṣṭha orders royal messengers to go and fetch Bharata immediately from his uncle's house to Ayodhya on the death of Daśaratha. They set out after having drawn the travelling and halting allowances (दत्तपथ्याशना),³ which Govindarāja interprets as दत्तमागर्शनहेतुभूतद्रव्याः In this connection we may mention another feature of ancient Hindu administration which is as much an anticipation of what is regarded as modern. Government servants were often transferred from one place to another (विक्षेप). The object of this is said to mitigate the evils of bribery and corruption, on the part of the servants.⁴ But there were certain offices which remained permanent, and there was no transfer of officers. These were those who were placed in charge of the palace, fortresses and country parts.¹