SHILLONG, JULY 8: Former executive engineer (EE) of the PWD (Buildings) Ransom Sutnga has threatened to take legal action against those making baseless allegations against him with regards to the construction of the new Assembly building at Mawdiangdiang.
“I want to request them to avoid making such allegations without any proof (otherwise) I will be compelled to take legal recourse,” Sutnga told reporters on Friday.
His statement also came days after the Hynniewtrep Youth Council (HYC) had demanded a CBI probe into the alleged escalation of the estimated cost for the construction of the new Assembly building.
Quoting an RTI reply, the HYC had alleged that EE of PWD (B) had changed the cost of tender value from the amount provided in the LOA of the original approved cost.
Reacting to this, Sutnga, who had recently availed VRS to contest the upcoming 2023 polls, said that the EE has no authority to enhance the tender cost because the financial powers of the EE is only Rs 6 lakh as per the financial rules.
He also explained the procedures that need to be followed if at all there is need to revise the estimates for the project.
He said firstly the office of the EE has to prepare the revised estimates and send them to the office of the Chief Engineer (CE) for approval.
“The CE would then send to the parliamentary affairs department, which will then call for the departmental sanctioning committee (DSC) for administrative approval and accordingly send it to the planning department, which would again send the same to the finance department for sanctioning of funds.”
On the allegation that EE had failed to seek the approval of the High Powered Committee (HPC) headed by the Assembly Speaker, Sutnga however said that the EE is not the competent authority to ask for any approval from the HPC.
Stating that people has the right to file RTIs but to misinterpret the information that can mislead the public at large, the former EE said, “From that very day the (dome collapse) incident happened personally I was very clear and I expressed that it is good to have a third party inquiry.”
Sutnga also admitted that the issue related to the Assembly building has become political and that he is being targeted because he is going to contest the upcoming polls.
“However, I request people not to politicize this issue in the interest of the people of the state,” he said.
When asked, the former engineer said there have been no irregularities as alleged in the implementation of the project as everything has been done according to the technical procedures.
“In every project, there is division and the original sanction cost of this project was Rs 141. 12 crore and this sanction estimate is being revised to Rs 177.78 crore. You have to understand the tender cost and the sanction cost. Suppose the sanction estimate is Rs 141.12 crore now the tender cost will be below that – there is always a difference between this two,” he said.
He further cited that there are many reasons for estimates to be revised. “For example, there are items which were deleted from the sanction estimates and these items when you are doing the construction you need to provide. Like the electrical sub-station, it was removed from the original sanction estimates and now ESS is required and so it is provided in the revised estimates – these are called deviations. We have to follow the official and technical procedures that is why the departmental sanctioning committee scrutinizes one by one of the items and then gives the administrative approval,” Sutnga stated.
He further maintained that his role in the construction of the new assembly was to be part of the team.
The teams which are supervising the implementation of the project include engineers and architects from the PWD, Design Associates.
“As per the allegation, it is only the PWD (B) EE who is supervising the project but I want to clarify that these are the teams which are supervising the project for construction of the Assembly building,” he said.
Meanwhile, Sutnga further denied that the construction of the ISBT was under his supervision.
By Our Reporter
+ There are no comments
Add yours