news details |
|
|
| Court framed corruption charges against then VC JDA & Ors | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Apr 1: Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu Haq Nawaz Zargar framed charges against Vinod Sharma then Vice-Chairman Jammu Development Authority, Ashok Kumar Gandotra Executive Engineer JDA and Syed Sajad Ahmed Qalander Prop M/s Ess Que Furniture Works.
Brief Facts of the case as per the challan are that a verification was conducted into the allegation that Vinod Sharma, the then Vice Chairman, Jammu Development Authority, Jammu without floating any tenders for renovation/interior works of JDA office Complex (Ground floor) Vikas Bhawan Jammu authorized his blue eyed agency namely M/S Ess Que furniture works for execution of the work worth crores etc. Verification revealed that Vinod Sharma during his posting as Vice chairman JDA, granted, approval for installation of 10 Nos. 2 ton ACs and some allied Certified electric works at ground floor of allotment section Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Complex Jammu for which tenders were floated by Engineer JDA-I, on receipt of communication from Superintending Engineer JDA, for supply and installation of 10 No's 2 ton split ACs with remote control and motor compressor of Blue Star/Voltas, Samsung make and for other electrical works of ground floor. During tendering process, M/S Luman Engineers was found as L-l, however, instead of allotting works to L-1 firm, the then VC JDA Vinod Sharma deliberately and intentionally under a well knit conspiracy hatched with T.R Sargotra, the then Superintending Engineer, JDA (now expired) and Ashok Gandotra, the then Executive Engineer, JDA-1 to confer undue benefit to a particular firm M/S Ess Que furniture Works, approved the renovation/interior works including Air Conditioning of office complex at JDA office for a cost of Rs. 40.83 lacs.
The scope of work was changed from the installation of ACs/ Electrical works to renovation/interior works along with installation of ACs without any tendering process, which resulted into the increase in expenditure incurred in this regard. The work was allotted on nomination basis to the above said firm without any justification as well as without any tendering in blatant violation of tendering process and requisite codal formalities. Verification had further revealed that as per validity of license, the said firm was not authorized to execute electrical works but the beneficiary firm still executed/completed the entire work of electrical/renovation/interior works at exorbitant rates in July-August-2011 for which payment amounting to Rs. 40.53 lacs was released in favour of M/S Ess Que Furniture Works. By acting in this manner, the then VC JDA Vinod Sharma, T.R Sargotra the then Superintending Engineer, JDA (now expired) and Ashok Gandotra, the then Executive Engineer JDA- 1 in league with each other and with the proprietor of beneficiary firm M/S Ess Que Furniture works, by abusing their official positions illegally and dishonestly conferred undue pecuniary advantage upon the proprietor of beneficiary firm M/S Ess que furniture Works. The Engineering Wing of ACB, as such projected a total loss of Rs. 2,12,295/- on account of civil works so executed based on sanctioned scheduled rates (SSR) and against installation of 04 Nos ACs, make carrier cassette design concealed type 1.5 TR configuration\working on remote system, based on rates for the said ACs provided by - carrier company. The loss to the state exchequer on account of electrical/renovation/interior works was estimated as Rs.2,12,295/-. Accordingly, the instant case was registered in P/S ACB under the above mentioned sections of law and the investigation was initiated.
Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu Haq Nawaz Zargar after hearing APP Amir Al Mansoor for the ACB whereas Sr. Adv Rahul Pant with Advocate Manik Khajuria for the alleged accused, observed that From the perusal of the charge sheet and the documents submitted there with and upon consideration of the oral submissions made by both sides and keeping in view the propositions of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases supra, this Court is of the opinion that prima facie, offence punishable under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1) (d) Prevention of Corruption Act Svt. 2006 and Section 120-B RPC are made out against the accused persons.
—JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
