PUDUCHERRY: A CBI team conducted inquiries at the residence of the Collector and Project Director, Project implementation Agency (PIA), G Ragesh Chandra, on Monday night and also at the office of the PIA prior to that, on irregularities in the construction of 1,436 tsunami houses. Based on a complaint by an NGO on irregularities in the construction of 1,436 Tsunami houses in Kalapet worth Rs 82 crore, the CBI team launched the enquiry. The newly-constructed houses were handed over to beneficiaeries by the Union Home Minister P Chidambaram in February.The complaint had been filed by the NGO in 2008, but the CBI took its own time to probe the allegations independently and finally initiated the inquiry process by questioning the Collector for over four hours at his residence at Lawspet. Reliable sources said that the CBI team which has been here since Saturday had collected some documents from the PIA office as well as from the residence of the collector. Earlier they had interrogated PIA executive engineer Mohan. Allegations have been made against former Chief Secretary Naini Jayaseelan, Ragesh Chandra, Mohan and Project Office, PIA Arunachalam. The inquiry was started after clearance from Government of India to interrogate Naini Jayaseelan, sources said.As per the complaint, the tender was allotted at a much higher rate than the approved one. This was in violation of the rules and that too scaling down on the specifications. Initially the government issued an order for construction of a unit house of 325 square feet at `1.35 lakh in 2005. Subsequently it was revised to `2.35 lakh in 2008 while floating the tender . However, when the tender was finalised, the work order was given for construction at the revised rates of `4.90 lakh per unit while maintaining the same size. Moreover, the houses constructed for four coastal villages of Pillaichavady, Periya Kalapet, Chinna Kalapet and Ganapathychettikulam were given to Hyderabad-based IBRCL limited. Though the tender specified that steel and cement specification had to be maintained at high standard, quality was compromised while awarding the tender by relaxing the norms. The complainant alleged that the difference in cost was given as kickback which was shared by influential people in the government . The complainant also questioned the necessity to cancel the first tender published in 2007, by Naini Jayaseelan on the grounds that it was ‘bill of quantity’, and later refloating it by replacing it with ‘turn key basis’. Questions were raised on that fact that while the government had paid `2.7 lakh to individuals to construct their houses at the place of residence, what was the reason behind varying rates in construction of the houses at Kalapet.
Comments
0 comment