MC under lens for allotment of civil dispensary project | chandigarh | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Jan 20, 2017-Friday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

MC under lens for allotment of civil dispensary project

chandigarh Updated: May 12, 2014 12:03 IST
Hillary Victor
Hillary Victor
Hindustan Times
Highlight Story

The municipal corporation (MC) of Chandigarh has come under the scanner over the allotment of construction work at the civil dispensary in Sector 50 to be constructed at a cost of Rs 2.33 crore.


The engineering department has included an item in the Detailed Notice Inviting Tenders (DNIT) of the said tender, which has not been executed at the site, giving undue advantage to the agency.


The matter came to light after one of the private construction companies, which participated in the tender bid, lodged a complaint with the MC commissioner that the company which was at number 5 in financial bid of the tender was given benefit of the item amount to over Rs 10 lakh, resultantly, the company became eligible for allotment of the tender, ignoring the right of the complainant, who was earlier declared lowest 1 (L1) applicant.

The MC invited e-tender for the said work with March 17 as the bid opening date and six out of seven participating agencies qualified the criteria for technical evaluation. The bids were opened on April 1 and the complainant was ranked L1 agency, but later on the agency ranked L5 became eligible as the MC cited that there was some error in the formula of the comparative excel sheet.

In his complaint, Aman Sood had stated that on analysing the bid, it was found that the tender was manipulated as item “Deduct for using less cement than the quantity as provided in the item of batch mix concrete as arrived as per mix design” was included in it.

Whereas as per the prevalent practice in the MC, the said item was not being executed at any of the ongoing projects or works, but with its inclusion, the MC was giving undue benefit to L5 agency and loss of lakhs to the exchequer, the complainant added.

However, when contacted, e xecutive e ngi neer In derjit Singh Gulati termed the allegations as baseless and said, “The company was never ranked L1, but there was an error of unit rate, which was cubic instead of quintal.”

<