Plaint of graft in survey equipment purchase: Kerala HC seeks details of steps taken by vigilance department

Kochi: High court has sought details of the steps taken by the vigilance department on a complaint alleging corruption in the tendering and purchase of equipment for the project to conduct a digital re-survey of 1,550 villages in the state, which allegedly caused a loss of more than Rs 150 crore to the exchequer.A bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice V M Syam Kumar issued the directive in a PIL filed by Shaji J Kodankandath of Thrissur, seeking a direction to the vigilance director to conduct a detailed investigation in the matter by constituting a special team. The petitioner stated that although the inspector of the vigilance special investigation unit had submitted a preliminary inquiry report in his complaint suggesting a detailed probe, no further action has been taken. While considering the plea on Thursday, HC directed the vigilance director to file an affidavit within three weeks stating the steps already taken in response to the complaint made by the petitioner.In 2021, the state govt approved the project to conduct a digital re-survey, to be completed in four phases at a total project cost of Rs 807.98 crore. Of this, Rs 339.438 crore was allotted for the first phase, out of which Rs 168 crore was estimated for the procurement of equipment for the digital survey. The petitioner claimed that the tenders invited twice for purchasing the equipment proved futile, as the participating companies quoted more than double the estimated procurement cost. The lowest quote received was Rs 365.95 crore from Hexagon Geosystems India Pvt Ltd.Subsequently, the offer of Hexagon Geosystems was accepted for supplying the equipment along with an annual maintenance contract for Rs 343.63 crore, as against Rs 365.95 crore, without issuing a fresh tender in line with the revised estimate. The petitioner alleged that, in light of the revision of the estimated amount for purchasing equipment, a fresh tender ought to have been invited. Instead, the lowest bidder in the earlier tender was awarded the work at revised rates.According to the petitioner, after conducting an inquiry, the vigilance inspector submitted a report seeking a detailed investigation into the matter. However, no further action has been taken yet, he stated.