Project money siphoned, many rules broken, says report Modi didn146;t table

The 10th report of the PAC 2005-2006 8212; earlier headed by Chandrika Chudasma and now by Punjabhai Vansh 8212; also says that about Rs 668-crore worth of contracts for earthwork under the scheme were awarded to a group of just 8-10 contractors, ignoring rules and regulations of the tender process while the department claimed, on paper, that 72 agencies were involved in the works.

Scrutinising the 1993-94 accounts and audit report of the Water Resources Department of Narmada, Water Resources and Water Supply and Kalpasar Department, the PAC has charged the departments with embezzlement, illegal award of contracts, misuse of government funds and poor quality construction under the Sujalam Sufalam scheme.

In its report, the PAC has called for investigating the tendering process while recommending action against former Water Resources Secretary M S Patel 8212; he is now posted as Secretary Kalpasar in the same department.

Consider what the PAC report says:

8226; Contracts worth Rs 668 crore were given to a group of 8-10 contractors, bypassing the tender process.

8226; Most contractors were not equipped for the work.

8226; Checkdams constructed at a cost of Rs 45 crore were washed away during the monsoon.

8226; Construction of checkdams, canals and earthwork under the Sujalam Sufalam scheme was supposed to be done with public participation 8212; which means villagers 8212; through the gram panchayats and contribute monetarily for the work. But Rs 668 crore worth of work was done without public participation.

Irregularities in the Sujalam Sufalam scheme are mentioned in five of the 40 pages of the PAC report.

8220;The idea of involving local people in construction of spreading canals and earthwork under the Sujalam Sufalam scheme was floated with good intention but scrutiny of documents and information available from the water resources department show that instead, contracts were given to contractors without even finalising unit rates and without any involvement of local people. The Public Accounts Committee is of the strong opinion that involving local people also means they also contribute some funds for the project which was done earlier in the case of building checkdams. However, by not involving local people and thereby raising 20 per cent or 40 per cent of the total expenditure of Rs 210 crore sanctioned for the project, the Secretary has caused a loss of Rs 42 crore if 20 per cent was raised to Rs 84 crore if 40 per cent funds were raised to the state treasury,8221; the report states.

8220;It is also a serious matter that all the contracts were issued to just eight or nine contractors. The PAC assumes that the Secretary has done this intentionally and with some purpose and suggests investigation and action against him,8221; states the report.

8220;The Chief Minister had given instructions that earthwork projects should involve local people through gram panchayats just like checkdams were built. Following that Rs 210 crore were released and in an order issued on October 16, 2004, unit rates were fixed for public tenders and distribution of work in the respective ares. Contractors with public participation were supposed to do the work and designated area officers would coordinate between the two8230; although the directives and instructions were very clear, the department circumvented them,8221; states the report.

8220;The department informed the PAC that contracts worth Rs 458 crores were given to 72 different agencies for about 337 km long earthwork but the PAC found that in reality the entire work was distributed between 8 to 10 contractors only. This was done intentionally. Some of these contractors neither had the capacity to bid nor were they competent to do the work, still they were given the contracts. The PAC is of the opinion that when the awarding of contracts came to the government for approval and the contracts were repeatedly being awarded to the same persons, it should have scrutinised or investigated the bid capacities of these contractors.8221;

8220;Not only this but contracts to do earthwork over spreading canals worth Rs 458 crore was also given to the same set of contractors. By giving these contracts haphazardly and intentionally to certain persons, the government was made to incur heavy losses. Though, there was a lead and lift clause in the tendering process, the contractors were all overpaid for their work. When the PAC asked for information about the designated borough areas and prescribed dumping zones, which is mandatory, the department failed to provide the information,8221; states the report.

8220;It has also come to the notice of the PAC that the government had no clue about estimated expenditure of each checkdam, where it is to be constructed, what is the tendering process. Neither did the corporation provide these details nor the government bothered to ask for them. The construction of the checkdams was also haphazard and poor. Many of these checkdams were washed away or collapsed during last monsoon. Design requirements were bypassed and the government suffered a loss of about Rs 45 crore because of this. The Secretary has attributed the loss of checkdams to unprecedented monsoon and that this extensive loss be included in the calamity relief fund. But the PAC doesn8217;t agree with this.8221;

8220;When questioned about the design and quality of construction of the checkdams, the Secretary did not give an explanation. Under these circumstances, a technical experts committee should investigate this and prepare a detailed report and the PAC recommends action against whoever is found responsible,8221; states the report.