Ongoing controversy over the multi crore irrigation scam has taken a new twist as the Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation (VIDC) has strongly justified the cost and time overruns in the implementation of 38 projects attributing it to the bonafide reasons. VIDC, which is a nodal agency for these projects, has also submitted that it would be incorrect and irrelevant to allege that the public money has been siphoned off.
VIDC made its position clear in an 527 pages affidavit submitted before the Nagpur bench of the Bombay high court which is hearing the petition filed by NGO Janmanch. VIDC said the approvals have been granted with due process of law and with all the requisite aspects and have not been granted hurriedly as alleged by petitioners.
VIDC has strongly opposed the petitioner's demand for a comprehensive probe by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or through an independent investigation agency. Instead, VIDC said it had initiated action against 26 officials based on the findings of Mendegiri and Wadnere committees. VIDC has appealed to the court to dismiss the petition filed by Janmanch on the grounds that the whole petition was misconceived. The Janmanch had demanded that based on reports of CBI inquiry or by through a competitive probe agency report the action should be taken against all the erring officials, bureaucrats and contractors, blacklist them and recover the amount from them.
The petitioners had argued that within seven months in 2009, cost of 38 irrigation projects escalated by Rs 20,050.06 crore, from Rs 6,672.27 crore to Rs 26,722.33 crore. Thirty out of the 38 projects were granted hurried approvals in just four days. Cost of these projects went up with the revised administrative approval granted at the level of VIDC. Cost of six projects rose by six times to 33 times of their original cost. In case of 12 projects, the cost shot up by more than twice the original estimates. The approvals were granted for increased cost when NCP leader Ajit Pawar was the water resources minister.
VIDC however, admitted that irrigation project on Human river project rose by 29 times, Khadakpurna project by 13 times, Lower Penganga project by six times and Junglekheda project by 33 times.However, it has also rejected allegations with regard to an unholy nexus between the politicians, contractors and government employees in awarding contracts and project implementation.VIDC's affidavit comes at a time when the state water resources minister Sunil Tatkare on Monday announced formation of a special investigation team led by water expert Madhav Chitale. The terms of reference and its members would be decided by December 31.
VIDC in its affidavit said " The cost escalations have not accrued in a span of seven months in 2009 nor such increased expenditure was made within these seven months. However, merely approvals to the revised cost were granted within these seven months considering the period of several years from the previous sanctioned costs." VIDC added the approvals have been granted with due process of law and with all the requisite aspects and have not been granted hurriedly as alleged by petitioners.
Furthermore, VIDC said after grant of approvals to the projects the cost of project may increase with the passage of time generally due to the various reasons including due to change in scope of project, in some projects in order to cover the areas beyond the originally benefitted area or beyond the original command of the project and thereby to increase the irrigation potential of the project. Canals are further extended or linked to irrigation schemes is additionally introduced.
According to VIDC, the delays in the project implementation and cost escalation were due to increase in schedule rates, increase in land acquisition cost, increase in rehabilitation grant for project affected persons (PAPs) and rise in quantities of some items due to changes in detailed designs.Besides, rise in the cost of construction material, sand metal, rubble also led to rise in costs.
Moreover, VIDC explained that the time overrun was also due to time taken in seeking forest clearance (minimum two to three years are required for the same), the decreased speed of construction, paucity of funds and strong opposition from PAPs. "There was increase in rate of alternative afforestation as the forest department does not allow to construct the project over the forest land unless the cost of afforestation in the alternate land are paid," VIDC added.
