The Sentinel: Guwahati: Friday, December 15, 2017.
The corrupt
practice initiated by a section of officials of the National Highway wing of
the State Public Works Department (PWD) in connivance with a section of
dishonest contractors is the root cause
of the dilapidated condition of the national highways in Assam. This is not a
complaint lodged any individual or organization, but it has been evident from
the written reply of PWD in response to an application under the RTI. Though of
late the State Government has expedited the pace of the repair and improvement
works of the National Highways, but a section contractors and Executive Engineers
have allegedly been involved in large-scale corruption using below standard
quality of materials.
An RTI
activist on October 17 t had submitted an application to the PIO of the office
of the Executive Engineer of PWD, Guwahati NH Division under RTI Act seeking information on the
periodic renewal from KM 6/000 to KM 32/000 (Krishnai to the approach of nara
Narayan Setu in Goalpara district) of NH 37 under Annual Program 2016-17
(phase-II) under Guwahati NH Division. The Assistant Executive Engineer-cum-the
PIO in his reply on October 31 vide letter no. Com.449/Pt/2017-18/4790, replied
that an amount of Rs. 9,45,55.672 was sanctioned for the work and the
specification of the Hot Mix plant to be used in the work should be of Batch
type HMP 100-120 TPH/Hot Mix Plant )DM-50 Drum Mix Plant 60-90 TPH. In the
work, Polymer Modified Bitumen (PMB) 70 Grade should be used and the paver
should be Hydraulic with Sensor Control. Further, the Bitumen plant required
hooper for filler agent.
The Assistant
Executive Engineer-cum-the PIO again on November 27 vide letter no.
Com.449/Pt/2017-18/5000 in his reply to another application filed on November
1, replied that as per the provisions of the tender agreement the Bitumen plant
must be inspected by an Inspection Committee before commencement of the work.
The RO of Ministry of Road Transport and Highways should take the initiative
for such inspection, but in this work no such inspection was done. For the
entire work a total of 911.15 metric ton Polymer Modified Bitumen (PMB) is
required. Though the department has claimed that the contractor has used the
required PMB in the entire work, but as per the cash memo submitted along with
the reply, it has come to the light that the contractor MP Agarwalla had
purchased only 9.5600 MT of PMB 70 grade.
Significantly
this PMB 70 grade Bitumen was delivered in the Guwahati office of the
contractor instead of the destined location at Paikan in Goalpara. On the other
hand, the contractor purchased 27.8240 MT and 26.9260 MT general quality
bitumen on September 19 and was delivered to the site at Paikan. Further on
October 30, the contractor concerned had purchased 18.490 MT Bulk Bitumen which
was also delivered at Paikan. From the written reply made by the Assistant
Executive Engineer-cum-the PIO, it has come to the light that the cost of PMB
70 grade is Rs. 39,750.00 per metric ton while the cost of general quality
Bitumen is Rs. 29,500 per metric ton. Significantly, the cost of Bulk Bitumen
is Rs.23,670 per metric ton.
From the copy
of the cash memos furnished by the Assistant Executive Engineer-cum- PIO of the
Office of the Executive Engineer, PWD, Guwahati NH Division, it is clearly
evident that the contractor concerned, in deep-rooted nexus with the officials
of the NH Division of the PWD, is trying to misappropriate an amount of Rs.
93,39,287 by using below standard quality of Bitumen. The use of general
quality Bitumen instead of 70 grade Plymer Modified Bitumen (PMB) in the repair
work of the stretch of NH 37 will surely damage the highway within a short
period.
It has been
alleged that the Executive Engineer concerned is taking the initiative to
prepare the bill hurriedly for making payment to the contractor concerned only
to misappropriate the huge amount. Will the Minister of PWD look into it and
order a high-level inquiry into the alleged corruption and irregularities of
the Guwahati NH Division of the PWD?
.JPG)
.JPG)
