4 engineers suspended, probe launched: Hatkeshwar flyover bridge to be demolished, FIR against 2 construction firms

The decision came after a team of experts ruled that it had severely compromised on quality and saw a “conspiracy” by the contractor and project management consultant.

“The whole bridge consists of eight spans. The main span is 42 metres and the others are 33 metres. The superstructure would be completely destroyed and reconstructed, as per the recommendations. This will be done simultaneously. The reconstruction cost will be recovered from the firms. The report on the quality of piles and piers of the bridge is yet to come,” said Thennarasan. Locals and opposition parties had staged several protests over the dilapidated condition of the bridge.

An FIR based on a complaint by AMC deputy city engineer Jignesh Patel, against both the firms was registered at the Khokhra police station under IPC sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), and 120 B (criminal conspiracy), against nine accused, Ramesh Patel (director and chairman of AEIPL) , Rasik Patel (director of AEIPL), Chiragkumar Patel (director of AEIPL), Kalpeshkumar Patel (director of AEIPL), AEIPL, Amit Thakkar (director of SGS India Private Limited), Shanshibhushan Jogani (director of SGS India Private Limited), Nilam Patel (project engineer of SGS India Private Limited) and SGS India Private Limited.

The Hatkeshwar bridge was thrown open to the public in 2017. From April 2021, there were four instances of deck settlements and one of box settlement in the bridge, the last being in August 2022, after which the bridge was closed to the public.

The AMC also commissioned various independent agencies to carry out inspections and sample testing, including the CIMAC laboratory, SVNIT, Surat, IIT-Roorkee, after which a three-member expert panel was appointed that opined that the “concrete quality is so poor that all available factors of safety in design and materials have been consumed by it”. A three member expert committee headed by former IIT-Roorkee professor Mahesh Tandon, members, Subodh Jain and Umesh Rajeshirke, observed that “no load test was carried out by the contractor before putting the bridge into operation” and “the concrete quality is so poor that all available factors of safety in design and materials have been consumed by it, and poor quality of concrete is the primary cause if failure.” The committee observed that “clear conspiracy on part of the contract and project management consulting in defrauding AMC”.

“The accused conspired together to form a pre-planned conspiracy and gained the confidence of the officials of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation to construct Hatkeshwar bridge on Khokhra-Hatkeshwar road, for which Rs. 39.87 crore tender was approved. The bridge was made using poor quality material and as per the reports of various authorised testing agencies, the bridge was not left suitable for use and had put the lives of the people at risk. By using the poor material for construction of Hatkeshwar bridge, the accused have committed the crime of fraud and betrayal of trust,” the FIR states.

Thennarasan added that the two firms would also be blacklisted. The contract given to Ajay Engineering Infrastructure Private Limited for work on another under-construction bridge at Pallav char-rasta (crossroads) has also been put on hold.

The eight engineers under probe include assistant engineer Satishkumar Patel, who was then the technical supervisor; assistant engineer Atulkumar Patel; assistant city engineer Ashish Patel; deputy city engineer Manoj Solanki, then an assistant city engineer; retired city engineer PD Patel; retired additional city engineer Paresh Shah who was then a deputy city engineer; retired additional city engineer Paresh A Shah, was then a deputy city engineer; and Hitesh Contractor who had retired as in-charge city engineer and additional city engineer but is currently an in-charge city engineer-on-contract.

AMC also addressed multiple letters to AEIPL and SGS, calling them out to do the required rectification work. However, these entities evaded AMC’s repeated requests and made excuses justifying the structural integrity of the bridge, contrary to what was discovered by AMC, the FIR states.

“The accused persons…have dishonestly dealt with, misappropriated, siphoned off and disposed of the said property in breach of the trust placed by AMC under the various contracts,” the FIR reads.