A proposal to amend the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurement (KTPP) Act to provide a legal framework for the tender exemptions provided to the Karnataka Rural Infrastructure Development Limited (KRIDL) has stirred a controversy.
Critics contend that the amendment will open the floodgates for other government bodies to seek similar exemptions under the KTPP Act, saying that the retrograde decision went against the demands to overhaul the legislation. Others contend that the amendment will be a blow to works reserved for contractors from the SC/ST community, who will be reduced to mere masons working for the KRIDL.
Officials say that though there was a suggestion for permanent changes in the KTPP Act to benefit the KRIDL, the final decision rested with the Finance Department, which is deliberating the issue.
According to a proposal, works under Rs 2 crore can be handed over to the KRIDL by government departments without tenders due to the exemptions envisaged in the amendments to KTPP. In the past, the government had to notify works carried out by the KRIDL with 4(G) exemption.
N Mahadevaswamy, president of Karnataka State SC/ST Contractors' Association, said that the proposed amendment was to circumvent a high court order which had stayed the government decision to hand over projects to the KRIDL.
The decision, he said, will rob SC/ST contractors — for whom 24.45% of projects below Rs 50 lakh are reserved — of government projects. "Already vested interests are working to dilute the benefits extended to the community. This will be detrimental to small contractors and will reduce us to mere masons employed by the KRIDL," he said.
Congress MLA Priyank Kharge, commenting on the proposal, said that the decision was against the demands to rehaul the KTPP Act and address its shortcomings. "This will also allow agencies like Nirmiti Kendra to knock on government doors to extend the same benefit of 4(G) exemption," he said, noting that the BJP was highly critical of allotting projects to the KRIDL while in the Opposition.
When contacted, L K Atheeq, Principal Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, said that since works were allotted to the KRIDL and exemption notices under 4(G) were issued annually, the suggestion of permanent amendment to the KTPP Act was proposed. "However, the Finance Department has to take a call on the issue," he said.
Sources said that a few ministers in the government were keen on pushing the legislation, adding that it would be raised in one of the upcoming Cabinet meetings.