Premium
This is an archive article published on November 18, 1999

PMC boss suspends Devp Engineer

PUNE, Nov 17: Municipal Commissioner Ratnakar Gaikwad today suspended Development Engineer (Development Plan) Vijay Keskar, a senior offi...

.

PUNE, Nov 17: Municipal Commissioner Ratnakar Gaikwad today suspended Development Engineer (Development Plan) Vijay Keskar, a senior officer in the administration, for committing serious irregularities while floating the tender for 40 ft submersible road from Deccan Gymkhana to Mhatre bridge along the river bank.

Gaikwad told media persons that Additional Municipal Commissioner Ashok Deshpande, who conducted the preliminary inquiry has stated in the report that Keskar had mishandled the tender issue. The report had held Keskar prima-facie responsible while the chargesheet would be filed against him soon. The commissioner, however, is yet to appoint another officer on the post of Development engineer.

It may be recalled that Gaikwad had promised in the general body that he would complete soon the inquiry against the person who was responsible for delay in submersible road. The issue was raised by Shiva Mantri and Ajit Darekar of Congress, alleging that the civic administration had committed serious irregularities while floating the tender for the work.

Story continues below this ad

The administration had floated a tender of Rs. 1.4 crore in January this year. The tender filed by Hemant Constructions, which was 24 per cent below the estimated cost, was sanctioned by the standing committee. The administration reportedly later sought explanation from Hemant Constructions asking how it would complete the work if the tender was 24 per cent below the cost. The administration sent three letters to the company but allegedly it did not receive any reply.

The administration later floated fresh tenders in May this year, which was objected to by the standing committee. The committee members maintained that the administration would have called the second lowest company if the first lowest company was in no position to complete the work. The issue was raised at the general body where corporators alleged that the entire exercise was done by the administration to favour a particular company.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement