AGARTALA, Oct 19 (TIWN): Advocates of Badal Choudhury said that this is a fully politically motivated case where Badal Choudhury has no connection and the decision was taken followed by Cabinet meeting.

After BJP Government assumed power in Tripura, it directed Vigilance to do investigation of PWD works held between 2008-09. The Govt alleged crores of scams and accordingly Badal Choudhury was summoned by Vigilance and the then Principal Secretary Y P Singh and PWD former Chief Engineer Sunil Bhowmik. However, Govt lawyers said there is no allegation against Y P Sing till now.

After PAC’s approval and quality of work was marked as excellent by central agency.

According to previous Govt and it’s the then cabinet, the whole project was done systematically.

Various package-tenders which were done with centre were cited by Vigilance and questioned him about the ‘cost bearings’. In each tender at least 10 to 15 tender-applications  were submitted and Badal Choudhury was carrying all the evidences.

1)    Choudhury earlier was called by Vigilance team twice but the whole funding and project history was "dropped downed" by Public Account committee (PAC) which certifies the construction works of 2008.

2)    In 2008, there was Planning Commission at Centre on that time when the constructions took place, which used to sanction an amount every year. Apart from that Tripura was under special category. Then we were a part of NEC, which also allocated a major shares. Also SC, ST, OBC, Minority dept got hefty funds. Whoever took the contract, it was said that at least 50% of the work should be done so that in the next planning commission we can place our demands for extra funds. On that situation, CPI-M held a meeting and a way was found to complete those works in fastest way”.

3)    Govt’s aim was to invite more numbers of Central private reputed companies. Then clubbing those companies the Govt gave the tenders and transferred 100 to 300 crores of project funds. Various companies successfully showed interest due to the packages.

4)    Then a cabinet meeting was done on 23rd June in 2008. In the cabinet meeting, it was decided that in case of CPCU, if 10% of the estimated cost is given then Chief Engineer can give work orders. In rest, whatever tender value will come, it will be given. 

5)    After the cabinet decision, it was seen that below 10% nobody did rate-code and all were above 20%, 30%. Retendering was not timeworthy.

6)    Then the Dept discussed the issue and in cabinet Y P Sing and CS briefed the matter in the meeting. Then decided to go to the work advising committee under CPWD rule. Chief Engineer’s right is only Rs. 2.50 crores. If above, then it has to go to the work advising committee. Work advising committee’s chairman is Chief Secretary and Secretary is Finance Secretary. In actual Finance Dept takes care of the issues.

7)    So after all tenders, they are sent to the work advising committee and then Finance Dept. Finance Dept call meeting, where Law Secretary, Senior Secretaries from various depts as industry etc stay as members of work advising committee. Their decisions are highest. There is no right of Minister and this is the system. So, here Badal Choudhury’s link as Minister with the funding cuts.

8)    Moreover in 2008, 23rd June Finance Dept called a meeting, where Law Secretary, Senior Secretaries from various depts as industry etc stay as members of work advising committee and their decisions are highest. There is no right of Minister, although Badal Choudhury observed the meeting and in that meeting 10% extra payment issue was discussed, source has said.

9)    Then new Govt came and new Public Accounts Committee was formed. All matters went to the Public Accounts Committee. The committee examined all works till 2013-14.

10)  Then 3 days Assembly session went on and on September 3rd, the 141st report of the Public Accounts Committee was placed. This report is under public report and there is no secrecy. From opposition, Bhanulal Saha was in the committee as chairman.

In 57 page, para 64 of the PAC record, it is written clearly, “The audit paragraph has brought out that the audit decision of the cabinet of 2008, June 23rd,  on a proposal of the public works department to award infrastructure development projects to central and public sectors undertaking public, private section, construction agencies, at cost plus basis limited up to 10% of the estimated cost based on the current state schedule. The department invited all…..only in 2008, July….…expression of interest……agencies with a view to shortening on the basis of the evolution of the technical and financial capabilities and the axing the short listed bidders for offering financial bids for a few specific package works and awarding and work/ packages to the lower bidders on cost plus percentage basis”.

Para 66, where it’s said that-----------“The representative of the dept stated, in his oral evidence as under dept our state is that the ideal expenditures have been on the day of inspecting of the audit. It was a correct observation of the audit on the day of inspection but on today we have completed all these projects. All projects of those agencies and that is why now as in today and this not idles. So all these have been functional…………also there was approval of work advisory….the decisions were taken by cabinet under CPWD system……..”.

In page 65, para 67, it is clearly stated by Public Accounts Committee clearly, “From the above position, the dept of the dept, the committee, drop the para…..(that is the work taken in page 64 para).

These statements from the Assembly proves that Public Account committee has high power and with all’s suggestion this para was decided to be dropped. So, once it is dropped by Public Accounts, it can not be challenged legally.

Earlier also Badal Choudhury was attempted to be put under bar via CBI, CID in various cases. Advocate Purushottom Roy Barman said, as Badal Choudhury has successfully represented the opposition in the Assembly, so he was targeted might be. 

Not only this, police illegally raided CPI-M HQ violating court's order when court said not to arrest Badal Choudhury till final order,  and later rejecting bail-bond of Choudhury under 'contempt of court'.