Scam overhead: 1 roof, many tenders
‘Anna Varsity Discovers New Way To Favour Contractors’
Siddharth.Prabhakar@timesgroup.com 07.09.2018
Chennai:
When Anna University had to renovate the ceiling of Vivekananda Auditorium at a cost of ₹28 lakh in 2015, it floated three separate tenders, one for the VIP area, one for the student area and another for the stage, despite all three being under one roof and one contractor eventually executing the work.
This was to keep each tender estimate under ₹10 lakh and thus avoid placing an advertisement in newspapers, thereby favouring a select coterie of contractors, says Jayaram Venkatesan, social activist. Such tender notices were put up only on the estate office notice board.
This modus operandi was followed for almost every civil work tender from 2013 till date. In 2017, authorities began to put up notices on the website.
“This has cut down on competition, leading to inflated costs, over-invoicing and loss of public money,” said Venkatesan.
Venkatesan and another whistle-blower have given a complaint to the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, vice-chancellor and Governor. The complaint is based on replies by the university to dozens of RTI applications.
Around 20 contracts awarded in this manner were worth ₹13 crore. The university awards at least 100 such small contracts every year.
For instance, Anna University issued five separate tenders (less than ₹10 lakh each) in the last one week for renovation of the corridor in the AC Tech main building. This was split as renovation on west wind, north west corner, north wing, north wing outer and inner quadrangle.
In another case in 2013-14, provision of electrical fittings, fans and power plugs for the three-storied ladies hostel was divided into eight separate tenders, all won by the same contractor.
Work for laying storm water drain and roofs for staff quarters was divided into houses in the A, B and C block and tendered separately, despite the work being the same. In 2014, the university floated separate tenders to paint the front and rear wing rooms of the international student hostel, executed by the same contractor.
Vice-chancellor V K Surappa, who has received a copy of the documents, told TOI that he would inquire into the issue. For work up to ₹6 lakh, the estate officer issues tenders; the registrar issues tenders for work up to ₹10 lakh.
Documents show that for most such work, there was an excess payment of up to 10%, which can be approved only by the vice-chancellor.
The estate officer, Professor V K Stalin, who has occupied the post since 2013, said the tenders were floated based on requests by individual departments. But he did not elaborate on why the same work was being divided into smaller tenders.
“There is no irregularity in this,” he said.
‘Anna Varsity Discovers New Way To Favour Contractors’
Siddharth.Prabhakar@timesgroup.com 07.09.2018
Chennai:
When Anna University had to renovate the ceiling of Vivekananda Auditorium at a cost of ₹28 lakh in 2015, it floated three separate tenders, one for the VIP area, one for the student area and another for the stage, despite all three being under one roof and one contractor eventually executing the work.
This was to keep each tender estimate under ₹10 lakh and thus avoid placing an advertisement in newspapers, thereby favouring a select coterie of contractors, says Jayaram Venkatesan, social activist. Such tender notices were put up only on the estate office notice board.
This modus operandi was followed for almost every civil work tender from 2013 till date. In 2017, authorities began to put up notices on the website.
“This has cut down on competition, leading to inflated costs, over-invoicing and loss of public money,” said Venkatesan.
Venkatesan and another whistle-blower have given a complaint to the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, vice-chancellor and Governor. The complaint is based on replies by the university to dozens of RTI applications.
Around 20 contracts awarded in this manner were worth ₹13 crore. The university awards at least 100 such small contracts every year.
For instance, Anna University issued five separate tenders (less than ₹10 lakh each) in the last one week for renovation of the corridor in the AC Tech main building. This was split as renovation on west wind, north west corner, north wing, north wing outer and inner quadrangle.
In another case in 2013-14, provision of electrical fittings, fans and power plugs for the three-storied ladies hostel was divided into eight separate tenders, all won by the same contractor.
Work for laying storm water drain and roofs for staff quarters was divided into houses in the A, B and C block and tendered separately, despite the work being the same. In 2014, the university floated separate tenders to paint the front and rear wing rooms of the international student hostel, executed by the same contractor.
Vice-chancellor V K Surappa, who has received a copy of the documents, told TOI that he would inquire into the issue. For work up to ₹6 lakh, the estate officer issues tenders; the registrar issues tenders for work up to ₹10 lakh.
Documents show that for most such work, there was an excess payment of up to 10%, which can be approved only by the vice-chancellor.
The estate officer, Professor V K Stalin, who has occupied the post since 2013, said the tenders were floated based on requests by individual departments. But he did not elaborate on why the same work was being divided into smaller tenders.
“There is no irregularity in this,” he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment