By Our Correspondent
BHUBANESWAR/KENDRAPARA: Police in Kendrapara and Bhadrak along with local MLAs of these 2 districts seems in collusion with Hyderabad based Megha Engineering India Pvt Limited, a Company, allegedly manipulated the entire tender process and Larsen & Toubro , India’s major technology, engineering, construction, manufacturing and financial services conglomerate, with global operations, which had bagged the Rs 268.11 Crore Drinking Water project by submitting lowest bid under Aul Assembly segment held by BJD’s Pratap Keshari Deb.
It may be noted here that the State Cabinet on March 6, 2021, had cleared the proposals of rural water supply schemes of the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation (RWSS) Division of the Panchayati Raj and Drinking Water Department for design, supply, erection and operation and maintenance for five years for six mega water supply projects.
The Kendrapara district administration imposed Prohibitory orders under Section 144 in three panchayats under Rajkanika block from today till October 8 for expediting the proposed mega drinking water project on Kharashrota river. The prohibitory orders have been imposed in Balakati, Bharigada, Barunadiha panchayats for two months. 12 platoons of police force have been deployed in the area to maintain law and order.
Following imposition of section 144, Farmers led by 2 locals former MLAs Dola Nayak and Deba Sharma blocked Cuttack-Chandabali State Highway near Gadagadi Ghat Bridge while Kendrapara Police have arrested several key activists of Kharasrota Banchao Sangram Samiti , which is opposing lifting of water from the River, a major tributary of mighty Brahamani, largely hit by Coal Mining in Angul-Dhenkanal, to neighbouring Bhadrak district as part of State Government’s Basudha Scheme project worth Rs 892 Crore, tender work of which awarded to Hyderabad based MEIL.
The Police action against KBSS clearly indicating how MEIL and L&T playing its cards in State Government’s Panchayati Raj and Drinking Water Department.
Locals have been protesting the project fearing it would not only result in the drying up of the riverbed, but it would also deprive irrigation to their farmland and lead to an acute drinking water crisis in the area.They have also alleged that the project is being carried out to provide free water to industries in Bhadrak under the garb of a drinking water project.
Highly placed sourced in Jal O Parimal Bhawan in Bhubaneswar revealed that Hyderabad based Megha Engineering and Infrastructure Ltd, which even despite lacking technical clearances, got majority work order of RWSS of the Panchayati Raj and Drinking Water Department for design, supply, erection and operation and maintenance for five years for six mega water supply projects.
The notice inviting tender (NIT) for rural water supply scheme for 26 gram panchayats of Sambalpur district and two GPs of Jharsuguda (BID No-EIC, RWSS-43/19-20), Golamunda block of Kalahandi district (BID No-EIC, RWSS-42/19-20) along with other two packages of Bargarh district was published on January 13, 2020 whereas notice inviting tender (NIT) for the Gondia and Bhuban block of Dhenkanal district ( BID No- EIC, RWSS-01/20-21), Jajpur and Binjharpur blocks of Jajpur district (BID No-EIC, RWSS-02/20-21) and other two packages for Jajpur and Kandhamal block was published on June 19, 2020.
The price bid for the Sambhalpur and Kalahandi district and other two packages Bargarh district was opened on August 19, 2020 and for Dhenkanal and Jajpur district and other packages of Jajpur and Kandhamal district was opened on November 12, 2020.For Sambhapur and Jharsuguda, UMSL was the lowest bidder, for Kalahandi district, KEC International Ltd was the lowest bidder, for Dhenkanal district Blue Star-SPML JV was the lowest bidder and for Blue Star-SPML JV was the lowest bidder and for Jajpur district, Laxmi Engineering was the lowest bidder.
However, surprisingly the department (RWSS) and tender committee had recommended to award the work of above four packages to Megha Engineering and Infrastructure Ltd who was accidently the second lowest bidder in all the four packages with value which is Rs. 38 crore more than the cost of all the four lowest bidders. Megha Engineering India Ltd, which was awarded the Bhadrak project, is facing rough weather after farmers in neighbouring Rajkanika and Aul in Kendrapara started opposing lifting of water from River Kharasrota.
It is alleged that the department had erroneously imposed the Clause 36 of OPWD Code which was not mentioned in the tender document for four schemes and for other two schemes of Khordha and Kendrapada districts. The department has restricted the competition by putting the same clause. It is also alleged that this was done intentionally to favour some companies, particularly the Megha Engineering and Infrastructure Ltd. It is understood that the department has wrongly applied the provisions of Clause 36, Annexure IX of Volume II, OPWD code to all the above four packages to throw out the lowest bidder and award the work to their favoured bidder i.e., Megha Engineering and Infrastructure Ltd. Further the experts also confirmed that the Clause 36 of OPWD is applicable to item rate contract, percentage rate contracts, contract for supply and carriage of labour and materials only which are already clearly mentioned in the OPWD code.
For all these types of contracts, the department would prepare the design, drawings and detail quantities. Any amendment to the code is restricted to only these categories of contracts only. For EPC types of contracts, the OPWD code is completely silent.In case of EPC type of contracts, the department only gives the requirement however as mentioned above the bidder would carry out all the investigation and design activities of the proposed works. Hence, the application of Clause 36 of OPWD code to the EPC types of contracts is illogical and illegal. Further, the other departments floating the EPC contracts which also falls under the purview of OPWD code, does not mention the clause in the bid document. In case of similar work for Urban Development Department, the work was awarded to the bidder who has quoted 17.03 per cent below the estimated cost of the project.The recently floated tenders of the WATCO and Irrigation Department do not mention the Clause 36 for EPC contracts. Then how only the RWSS is applying the clause to their EPC contracts. By application of this clause the department is spending more money for the work and cause huge loss to public exchequers.
The Clause 36 was not mentioned in the bid documents for all the tenders floated by them since beginning till the above packages which was invited vide the NIT dated June 19, 2020.
Thereafter, the department has included the clause invariably in all the tenders. To add any clause the proper approval procedure and concurrence from the Government is required. Without approval, how the department has inserted the above clause which is not applicable to EPC contracts has included in the bid document?As per the CVC guidelines, when the department has any doubt pertaining to the price offered by the bidder, then the respective department should call the lowest bidder and ask the bidder to justify the cost
