Mumbai: The Bombay high court has permitted a social activist to make the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) a respondent in a public interest litigation on the alleged irrigation scam in Maharashtra.
Petitioner Pravin Wategaonkar made an oral plea on the addition before a bench headed by Justice Ajay Khanwilkar on Thursday. The bench allowed him to amend the PIL to make CAG a party before January 7, 2013, and posted the matter for further hearing on January 15.
The court has already received the state’s response to the petition. In it, the state denies allegations of a nexus between ministers and contractors, but admits to several irregularities.
For instance, it acknowledges that the governing council headed by the state water resources minister met just 49 times in 10 years up to 2010. As per law, the council is required to meet every month to approve and review important decisions. Attempting to write off the dereliction as inconsequential, the state said, “Lesser meetings did not hamper the performance of Konkan Irrigation Development Corporation (KIDC) projects.”
But it might have. The PIL notes that KIDC did not pay Rs 8.25 crore as compensation to the villagers affected by the Jamda project in Ratnagiri. And yet it gave Rs 26.33 crore to the contractor as “idle payment charges” because work was held up owing to villagers’ protests over lack of compensation. The state, in the response, says it “only sanctioned the amount” and has not paid the contractors yet.
In a similar instance, the state confesses paying “idle payment charges” of Rs 7.4 crore to a contractor for a project at Nardave in Sindhudurg because protesting villagers stalled work. The PIL argues that while KIDC paid the contractor hastily, it failed to give less than half that amount to the forest department for acquiring forestland. The state’s defence simply is that the forest department never demanded money.
According to the PIL, no work can legally begin on a project unless all required land is acquired. But the state maintains that dam projects are split into two parts: land for one part is acquired and work on it begins. The PIL calls this strategy a ploy as part of “institutionalised irregularities and corruption” to delay projects and allow cost overruns.
Courtesy:
Swati Deshpande | TNN
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2012/12/21&PageLabel=7&EntityId=Ar00702&ViewMode=HTML
Petitioner Pravin Wategaonkar made an oral plea on the addition before a bench headed by Justice Ajay Khanwilkar on Thursday. The bench allowed him to amend the PIL to make CAG a party before January 7, 2013, and posted the matter for further hearing on January 15.
The court has already received the state’s response to the petition. In it, the state denies allegations of a nexus between ministers and contractors, but admits to several irregularities.
For instance, it acknowledges that the governing council headed by the state water resources minister met just 49 times in 10 years up to 2010. As per law, the council is required to meet every month to approve and review important decisions. Attempting to write off the dereliction as inconsequential, the state said, “Lesser meetings did not hamper the performance of Konkan Irrigation Development Corporation (KIDC) projects.”
But it might have. The PIL notes that KIDC did not pay Rs 8.25 crore as compensation to the villagers affected by the Jamda project in Ratnagiri. And yet it gave Rs 26.33 crore to the contractor as “idle payment charges” because work was held up owing to villagers’ protests over lack of compensation. The state, in the response, says it “only sanctioned the amount” and has not paid the contractors yet.
In a similar instance, the state confesses paying “idle payment charges” of Rs 7.4 crore to a contractor for a project at Nardave in Sindhudurg because protesting villagers stalled work. The PIL argues that while KIDC paid the contractor hastily, it failed to give less than half that amount to the forest department for acquiring forestland. The state’s defence simply is that the forest department never demanded money.
According to the PIL, no work can legally begin on a project unless all required land is acquired. But the state maintains that dam projects are split into two parts: land for one part is acquired and work on it begins. The PIL calls this strategy a ploy as part of “institutionalised irregularities and corruption” to delay projects and allow cost overruns.
Courtesy:
Swati Deshpande | TNN
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2012/12/21&PageLabel=7&EntityId=Ar00702&ViewMode=HTML
No comments:
Post a Comment