PANAJI
A scathing performance audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India has concluded that the Captain of Ports (CoP) handed undue benefits worth Rs 3.14 crore to contractors while executing desilting works along River Sal, after bypassing competitive tendering norms, flouting procurement rules and issuing contracts on a nomination basis.
In its report for the period ending March 2023, the CAG said the CoP failed to uphold the basic principles of economy and transparency in public spending.
Under the Phase 1 project, the CAG stated that the contract awarded was at 45 per cent below the estimate, but additional work was handed on nomination.
The CoP had estimated Rs 15.38 crore for desilting the Telaulim–Varca New Bridge to Shatmalley stretch in March 2020. Competitive bidding brought the project cost down sharply, with M/s Vaibhavi Dredging winning the tender at Rs 8.46 crore -- 45 per cent below the estimate. The work was completed in May 2021.
However, after fresh requests from government departments and the Dramapur–Sirlim Panchayat, additional work worth Rs 3.97 crore was sanctioned in March 2021. Instead of calling fresh tenders -- a requirement under procurement rules -- the CoP awarded the additional work on October 22, 2021 on a nomination basis to the same contractor.
For Phase 2, the CAG observed that a similar pattern of additional works was followed without tendering. CAG’s findings revealed excess payment of Rs 3.14 crore.
During scrutiny on February 9, 2023, the CAG found irregularities. “Additional works were taken up during the execution of original works both in Phase 1 and Phase 2. As per the Manual for Procurement of Works, 2019, the cost of any additional work exceeding 25 per cent of the original contract value of the work should undergo a tendering process. The amount of the additional works taken up by the CoP amounted to 47 per cent and 36 per cent of the original works in Phase 1 and 2, respectively. Hence, the works should have been tendered instead of being awarded on nomination basis,” it said.
The audit observed that, given that the initial tenders were awarded at prices 45 per cent and 19 per cent below the estimated costs, the same principle should have been applied to the additional work.
“However, this procedure was not followed, and additional work was awarded without applying the 45 per cent and 19 per cent reduction from the estimated cost and additionally, cost of mobilization and demobilization of de-silting machinery was also paid, which resulted in excess payment of Rs 3.14 crore to the contractor,” it added.
The audit also highlighted that the tender for Phase 3 of the project contained the same quantities and estimated costs as Phases 1 & 2 and this was awarded at 37 per cent below the estimated cost. “Thus, tenders for all three phases attracted competitive proposals below the estimated cost,” it said.
