MCG legacy waste tender controversy, 14 officials ‘flagged’ for bypassing administrative approval

The document said that 14 officials were part of a committee that cleared tenders related to remediation of legacy waste at the Bandhwari landfill, however, the tenders were issued internally without legal approval.

Gurugram: A major procedural lapse has come to light in the Municipal Corporation of Gurugram (MCG) involving three legacy waste tenders worth nearly ₹100 crore. It was revealed that many senior officials initiated and processed the tenders without mandatory administrative approval from the Haryana government, according to government documents.

Officials said tenders were awarded and processed at “record speed” (Representative photo)

The document said that 14 officials were part of a committee that cleared tenders related to remediation of legacy waste at the Bandhwari landfill, however, the tenders were issued internally without legal approval.

The controversy traces back to three separate tenders floated in 2024 for reclamation of 5 lakh metric tonnes (MT) of legacy waste under Phase V, 5 lakh MT under Phase VI, and 4 lakh MT under Phase VII at Bandhwari.

As per the rules, the proposals for projects worth ₹100 crore or more must be submitted to the Urban Local Bodies (ULB) Department for scrutiny, followed by administrative approval from the chief minister. Officials allegedly conducted rate approvals, floated tenders, and issued work allotments before clearance from the state government.

A confidential government communication, dated December 3, 2025, lists disciplinary action to be taken under Rule-7 of the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 2016, against at least five senior officials, including the then chief engineer Manoj Yadav, superintending engineer Vikas Malik, executive engineer Nijesh Kumar, and consultants OP Goyal and Rajiv Kumar.

Officials said tenders were awarded and processed in “record speed,” with agencies allegedly pushing for bill payments despite poor compliance with work specifications. Subsequent inspections found substandard execution, resulting in penalties of around ₹9 crore and cancellation of contracts in July 2025.

Internal correspondence shows the chief secretary’s office repeatedly sought draft chargesheets and certified records from MCG, but action stalled for nearly four months, prompting reminders to submit documents “without any further delay.”

Officials added that the manner in which approvals were handled raises questions about intent. “Rate approval came before administrative approval, and the tender process started before the government could examine financial and technical viability,” said Ravinder Yadav, MCG additional commissioner. Yadav added that relevant documents were forwarded after the tenders were already awarded.

MCG officials said only 10 names were included in the disciplinary list. “Some senior officials managed to exclude their names. The ULB department has sought clarification on why certain names were removed from the list, and whether any conflict of interest or financial influence played a role in expedited allotments,” said a senior official, requesting anonymity.

The investigation is underway and further administrative decisions are expected in the coming weeks, added officials.