Saubhagya Yojana- Failure in Implementation
The Modi Government initiative- Pradhan Mantri Sahaj Bijli Har Ghar Yojana also known as Saubhagya Yojana is lost somewhere due to delay in government working and scams. Central government was to allot funds to every state for the successful implementation of this scheme.
Under this scheme the states and central government run states were to complete the work of installation by 31st December 2018 to make electricity available in every household. For the completion of which every state has invited tenders from the contractors according to the needs. With regard to this an issue has come to light about Madhya Pradesh government. MPEB has not followed the guidelines of Central Vigilance Committee (CVC) which was prepared by M. Vitthal for every government tender. Not following the Rule 25.2 (Price Quotation in Tender) of Madhya Pradesh Warehouse Purchase Rules and Service Acquisition Rules 2015, dated 28/07/2015, number: F 6-14/2012/A-11 which was presented by Mohammad Suleman, Chief Secretary, Madhya Pradesh Government, Commerce, Industry and Employment Department, contains clear instructions regarding purchase of equipments from local producers is causing the delay in this scheme. The work of purchase is being given to producers of other states instead of the local producers. This arises many questions like why were the orders not given when even after releasing the tender? Is the state government not serious towards the welfare of local producers? When local producers are given priority in other states why not in Madhya Pradesh?
SN ITEM REQ. OF CENTRAL DISCOM, BHOPAL REQ. OF EAST ZONE DISCOM, JBP REQ. OF WEST DISCOM, INDORE TOTAL REQ. FOR SAUBHAGYA TENDER No. TENDER QTY. FOR SAUBHAGYA TENDER FINALISED FOR QTY. % QTY.NOT PURCHASED AGAINST TENDER INVITED ORDER PLACED TO MP STATE UNITS
1 PVC Cable
2C x 2.5 Sq. mm 60000 Kms. 38500 Kms. 1500 Kms. 10,0000 Kms. MD/MK/04/533 100000 Kms. 0 Kms. 100.00% 0%
2 AB Cable
1×25+1×16+1×25 Sq. mm. 6800 Kms. 10000 Kms. 8200 Kms. 25,000 Kms. 25000 Kms. 10200 Kms 40.80% 2%
3 AB Cable
3×25+1×16+1×25 Sq. mm. 4897 Kms. 25000 Kms. 103 Kms. 30,000 Kms. 30000 Kms. 12500 Kms 58.00% 2%
3 XLPE Cable
1×35 Sqm. Mm. 4453 Kms. 5000 Kms. 547 Kms 10,000 Kms. 10000 Kms. 5500 Kms. 45.00% 2%
4 XLPE Cable
1×70 Sqm. Mm. 500 Kms. 500 Kms. 0 Kms. 1,000 Kms 1000 Kms. 1000 Kms. 0.00% 2%
25 KVA 15000 Nos. 45000 Nos. 15000 Nos. 75000 Nos. MD/MK/04/532 75000 Kms. 39500 Nos. 47.33% 10%
7 AAAC Rabbit Conductor 38000 Kms. 57000 Kms. 5000 Kms. 100000 Kms. MD/MK/04/531 100000 Kms. 64000 Kms. 36.00% 3%
8 Energy Meters
Single Phase 5-30 Amp. 1640000 Nos. 1490000 Nos. 370000 Nos. 3500000 Nos. MD/MK/04/534 3500000 Nos. 3077820 Nos. 12.00% 0%
9 Energy Meters
Single Phase 10-40 Amp. 23644 Nos. 26356 Nos. 0 Nos. 50000 Nos. 50000 Nos. 50000 Nos. 0.00% 0%
Central Government declared this scheme in September last year to make electricity available to 45 lakh households under Saubhagya Yojana. Madhya Pradesh government released tenders for this scheme but it is being jeopardized due to personal interests and because of which governmental instructions are being violated. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Company is made the nodal agency for tenders of Transformer Cable Conductor of around 950 to 1000 crore but question arises that how effectively this procedure is being followed there.
Very small percentage of the material given in the tender was purchased from the local producers; rest was purchased from the producers of other states. Following facts are the proof of this. Tenders for PVC cable were invited but not purchased, 60 percent of AB cable was purchased out of which only 2 percent was taken from state government, only half of the required distribution transformer was purchased out of which only 10 percent came to state government’s account, rest 90 percent was purchased from someone else. Same is the case with AAAC conductors and energy motors. The necessary supply and quantity for the material was decided and afterwards almost less than half of it was accepted for this scheme and what was accepted the very little of it was purchased from the local producers of Madhya Pradesh. This arises many questions.
If required quantity of material for tender was decided why later on it was decreased?
Even if it was decreased it was almost 50 percent so was it for some personal profit?
Even after accepting the tenders only small part of it was given to state government, why the rest of it was purchased from outside the state?
Is the state government not interested in increasing its revenue? Is the state government not concerned about the interest of local producers? Is the personal interest of officers behind all this?