Vice Principal & Principal 2026 — 5,847 explained questions, 18 chapters and 13 full papers for the DoE Delhi CRT.Start reading
Principal Sarathi VP & Principal 2026

Physical Verification of Library Books — GFR Rule 215

Rule 215 of the GFR, 2017 — the 20,000 and 50,000-volume slabs, complete versus sample verification, the loss of five per thousand issued, the books that must always be investigated, and the procedure for a school library.

7 sections · 20 explained questions · English and Hindi

THE SLAB SYSTEM

Rule 215(i) — how often you must verify

The frequency of verification depends ENTIRELY on the SIZE of the library — the number of volumes it holds.

Size of library Type of verification How often
Not more than 20,000 volumes COMPLETE physical verification EVERY YEAR
More than 20,000 and up to 50,000 volumes COMPLETE physical verification At least once in THREE YEARS
More than 50,000 volumes SAMPLE physical verification At intervals of not more than THREE YEARS

The exact words of the Rule

"Complete physical verification of books should be done every year in case of libraries having not more than twenty thousand volumes. For libraries having more than twenty thousand volumes and up to fifty thousand volumes, such verification should be done at least once in three years. Sample physical verification at intervals of not more than three years should be done in case of libraries having more than fifty thousand volumes. In case such verification reveals unusual or unreasonable shortages, complete verification shall be done."

1.1 The three things to notice

① The slab changes TWO things at once, not one.

Going from the first slab to the second changes the frequency — yearly becomes three-yearly. Going from the second to the third changes the TYPE — complete becomes sample.

⚠️ The commonest mistake is to think only the frequency changes. A library of 60,000 volumes does not do a complete verification every three years; it does a sample verification.

② The safety valve — the sentence most notes leave out.

"In case such verification reveals UNUSUAL OR UNREASONABLE SHORTAGES, COMPLETE VERIFICATION SHALL BE DONE."

So a sample verification is not the end of the matter. If the sample throws up a shortage that looks abnormal, the library must go on to a complete count. Note the word — "shall", not "may". It is mandatory.

③ The thresholds are expressed carefully.

"NOT MORE THAN twenty thousand" → a library of exactly 20,000 falls in the first slab and verifies every year. "MORE THAN twenty thousand and UP TO fifty thousand" → a library of exactly 50,000 falls in the second slab. "MORE THAN fifty thousand" → only 50,001 and above moves to sample verification.

1.2 A memory device

20,000 → every year, complete 50,000 → every three years, complete Above 50,000 → every three years, SAMPLE

The pattern: the bigger the library, the less often and the less thoroughly — because counting half a million books annually would close the library for months. The rule trades completeness for practicability, and buys back the risk with the "unusual shortage" safeguard.

The rest of this note

Three questions from this note, solved

Q1

Match List-I with List-II (Rule 215, GFR 2017):

List-I (Library) List-II (Verification required)
A. Exactly 20,000 volumes 1. Sample, at intervals of not more than three years
B. Exactly 50,000 volumes 2. Complete verification shall be done
C. 50,001 volumes 3. Complete, every year
D. Verification reveals unusual shortages 4. Complete, at least once in three years

Select the correct code:

  1. (a) A-3, B-1, C-4, D-2
  2. (b) A-3, B-4, C-1, D-2
  3. (c) A-4, B-1, C-3, D-2
  4. (d) A-3, B-4, C-2, D-1
Answer (b).

A-3, B-4, C-1, D-2. The thresholds are worded carefully: 'not more than twenty thousand' puts a library of exactly 20,000 in the first slab — complete verification every year; 'more than twenty thousand and up to fifty thousand' puts exactly 50,000 in the second — complete verification at least once in three years; only 'more than fifty thousand', that is 50,001 and above, moves to sample verification at intervals of not more than three years. And in case such verification reveals unusual or unreasonable shortages, complete verification shall be done — mandatory, not discretionary. (a) sends exactly 50,000 to sampling, though sampling begins only above 50,000, and gives 50,001 a complete count; (c) puts exactly 20,000 in the three-year slab, exactly 50,000 under sampling and 50,001 in the annual slab; (d) gives 50,001 volumes a complete count and answers an unusual shortage with another sample.

Q9

Consider the following statements: Statement-I: A shortage within five per 1,000 of the books issued is still recoverable if it is traced to a staff member's negligence. Statement-II: The permissible-loss allowance applies only where the loss is not attributable to dishonesty or negligence. Select the correct answer using the code given below:

  1. (a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, and Statement-II explains Statement-I
  2. (b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
  3. (c) Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect
  4. (d) Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct
Answer (a).

Both statements are correct, and Statement-II explains Statement-I. The loss of five per 1,000 may be taken as reasonable provided such losses are not attributable to dishonesty or negligence, so the allowance is not a blanket amnesty: if a shortage is traced to a careless or dishonest person, the 0.5% allowance gives him no protection — the loss is recoverable and disciplinary action follows. (b) denies the link, though the condition in Statement-II is exactly why the allowance does not shield negligence; (c) rejects Statement-II, which is the proviso of the rule; (d) rejects Statement-I, treating the allowance as protection whatever the cause.

Q10

Consider the following statements about Rule 215(ii): 1. The loss of an ordinary ₹1,200 book must be investigated even if the shortage is within the allowance. 2. The loss of an ordinary ₹800 book, within the allowance and not due to dishonesty or negligence, must be investigated. 3. The permissible loss of five per 1,000 equals 0.5%. Which of the statements given above are correct?

  1. (a) 1 and 2 only
  2. (b) 1 and 3 only
  3. (c) 2 and 3 only
  4. (d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer (b).

Statements 1 and 3 are correct. A book of a value exceeding ₹1,000 must always be investigated, however small the overall shortage, and the permissible rate of 5 volumes per 1,000 is 0.5%. Statement 2 is wrong: the two categories invariably investigated are a book worth more than ₹1,000 and any rare book; an ordinary ₹800 book lost without dishonesty or negligence falls within the allowance, which may be taken as reasonable. (a) accepts statement 2 and drops statement 3; (c) accepts statement 2 and drops statement 1, though ₹1,200 exceeds ₹1,000; (d) accepts statement 2 as well, extending mandatory investigation below the ₹1,000 trigger.

Read this note in the library → All 33 notes