HC directs ACB to file progress report in irrigation scam
| Date :04-Jul-2019 |
Staff Reporter:
Admits PIL seeking probe into irrigation scam for final hearing
Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court on Wednesday admitted public interest litigations demanding probe into mind-boggling irrigation scam, for final hearing. The High Court while admitting the petitions also observed that it would keep a close watch on the ongoing probe conducted by special investigation teams of Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) against the scamsters including political big-wigs of erstwhile regime, heavyweight contractors and some very high profile officers. A division bench consisting of Justice Sunil Shukre and Justice Shriram Modak after a brief hearing admitted the PILs for final hearing while directing the ACB to submit its progress reports. It was only after a tough stance adopted by the High Court, the ACB was forced to form two dedicated SITs and file chargesheets against the scamsters before the special court.
The PILs filed by Jan Manch and activist Atul Jagtap took an interesting turn six months ago when for the first time, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) directly indicated involvement of Ajit Pawar, the then Water Resources Minister and Deputy Chief Minister for presiding over a regime in which “procedures were bypassed, pecuniary benefits were passed on, sub-standard work allowed leading to drain upon public exchequer.”
The then ACB Director General Sanjay Barve in his affidavit filed before Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court in November 2018 had charged Pawar and VIDC top officials for “trying to hid behind framework of rules” in this “weird case of conspiracy,” in which VIDC officers “have conspired to cheat the government and defraud the public exchequer,” while acting in “an orchestrated manner.” Describing Pawar as “dramatis’ personae who put up this performance that cost the State dearly,” ACB had also revealed that it was looking into money-trail to unearth the entire conspiracy and prove criminal liability of high and mighty who are now citing technical rules to deny their responsibility. Wondering about “sinister similarity” in awarding irrigation contracts worth thousands of crore, the ACB had also noted that these “recurring features” are not merely coincidental and indicate “a criminal conspiracy to defraud the Government under the garb of subverted and sham procedures and through the instrumentalities of minions in the department and its corporations like VIDC.”
The irregularities took place during 2004-2008, and entire scam was highlighted by The Hitavada in its “Black Paper on Irrigation” way back in 2012 and open enquiry was ordered by Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis on December 12, 2014 against Ajit Pawar, Sunil Tatkare and Chhagan Bhujbal. The explosive affidavit having wide legal and political ramifications filed by ACB had clearly stated that there was a “recurring pattern” in entire irrigation scam matters by inflating tender cost, awarding work to favoured contractors and without obtaining any sanction from the Government and keeping Secretary of the WRD in dark. The ACB had also rejected the feeble justification given by VIDC to absolve Pawar of any wrong doing and for not violating Maharashtra Government Rules of Business and Instructions while clearly pointing the finger towards Pawar. Commenting on this mind-boggling scam spread over one and half decade, the ACB had noted that it resulted in delaying projects, escalation of cost, denying gain to Vidarbha region and farmers and depriving them from multiple cropping and assured irrigation for decades. If these costs were to be quantified, the loss to state exchequer and national wealth would be colossal. Adv Firdos Mirza (Jan Manch), Adv Shridhar Purohit (Jagtap), Senior Advocate Anand Jaiswal (State), Adv Deven Chauhan (Bajoria), Adv Shrirang Bhandarkar (Pawar) appeared in the matter.
Substance in allegations made in PILs The ACB has acknowledged “with gratitude” the facts brought on record in the PILs filed by Jan Manch and Atul Jagtap. Jan Manch had submitted evidence against irregularities and highlighted that within a span of just seven months in 2009, cost of 38 irrigation projects under VIDC had escalated by a whopping Rs 20,050.06 crore -- from Rs 6,672.27 crore to Rs 26,722.33 crore. Thirty out of these 38 projects got hurried approvals in just four days -- August 14, 2009 (11 projects); June 24, 2009 (10 projects); July 7, 2009 (5 projects), August 18, 2009 (4 projects). Cost of six of these projects went up by 6 times to 33 times of their original cost and in case of 12 projects, the cost shot up by more than twice the original estimates. The ACB confirmed that several observations subsumed in the petitioners were found to be factually correct during scrutiny. As such “ACB is not on an adversarial pedestal vis-a-vis the present petitioners” and promised to take these “enquiries and investigations to their logical denouement.”
What ACB found Engineers and accounts-officers of VIDC examined by ACB claim innocence while contractors claimed that the works were awarded to them through a tender process and had nothing to do with cost escalation. They also passed on responsibility of forged pre-qualification (PQ) documents upon power of attorney holder. Pawar took the defence that he took decisions based upon the recommendations of the Secretary level officer and that most of the decisions were at field level while taking cover under Rules 14 of the Maharashtra Government Rules of Business and Instructions. ACB after careful scrutiny of documents, rules came to conclusion that there was a clear “cyclic pattern or modus operandi in most works related to Gosikhurd and Jigaon projects.”
The cost of Gosikhurd rose from Rs 372.22 crore in 1983 to Rs 18,494 crore which is 4968.70% in case of Jigaon the cost rose from Rs 394.83 crore in 1990 to Rs 5708.11 crore The ACB also pointed out cartelisation between contractors, issuing tender advertisement even before receiving technical sanction, issuing tender documents to non-eligible bidders and joint ventures even without prior registration of JV. Even the JV route was taken to avoid the disqualification and to bag more than 3 contracts. IN most cases, the pre-decided contractor paid EMD of other contractors and to avoid real competition reducing tender process to mere farce. According to ACB, 74.35% bids were above 5 per cent and no bid was at par or below the tender cost.
Even the small tenders issued for Gosikhurd work, 145 tenders were higher than the tender cost by Rs 480.75 crore during Pawar’s tenure. In sharp contrast, the tenders issued during and after 2015, the lowest bidder quoted below 20.65% . There was no provision to provide mobilisation advance to contractors under VIDC rules but it was done in clear departure of statutory framework. The total amount of mobilisation advance in Gosikhurd is Rs 182.96 crore and Rs 12.11 crore in Jigaon and even these proposals were not routed through Principal Secretary, WRD, though grant of mobilisation advance was a policy matter and should have been routed through Principal Secretary, WRD, the ACB noted while slyly endorsing yet another charge against Pawar. The ACB noted several flaws in cost escalation mechanism adopted during DF regime when Pawar was at the helm of affairs and noted that effort was made to somehow fit the updated cost within 5% of tender cost to avoid any liability. It is impossible that experienced field officers of WRD and VIDC would dare to such acts in normal course of their working, the ACB pointed out while hinting at the higher-ups in the chain of command.