TNR EXCLUSIVE STORY
Munish Sood
Haroli (Una)
In a detailed complaint raising serious questions over public fund utilisation, advocate and social worker Rohit Katwal has alleged “prima facie double drawal of government funds” in the rejuvenation and restoration of the Gondpur Jaichand pond in Una district.
Speaking exclusively to The News Radar, Katwal described the matter as “a clear case of overlapping sanctions and procedural violations,” and has urged the State Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau to initiate a preliminary enquiry under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
“The official record indicates that two separate funding streams have been deployed on the same physical asset, with the same executing agency and without any disclosure or segregation of scope,” Katwal stated.
Parallel Sanctions on the Same Project
Katwal pointed out that the project first received a sanction of ₹25 lakh in March 2024 under the PMKKKY scheme through the District Mineral Foundation Trust (DMFT), Una, with the Jal Shakti Division, Haroli designated as the executing agency.
“A Utilization Certificate has been submitted claiming full expenditure of the sanctioned amount, yet there is no completion certificate and no recorded completion date,” he said.
He further highlighted that a second approval was granted in September 2024 under the HP Bulk Drug Park scheme, with a technical sanction of ₹31.98 lakh and a DPR estimating the total cost at ₹34.31 lakh—again for the same pond.
“At a conservative estimate, nearly ₹56.98 lakh has been sanctioned for one village pond. Both approvals appear to have progressed independently, without cross-referencing or acknowledgement of parallel funding,” Katwal alleged.
Measurement Book Under Scrutiny
Katwal emphasised that the Measurement Book (MB), which forms the basis for certifying work and releasing payments, appears to have been used across both funding streams.
“Identical quantities of excavation, masonry, reinforced concrete works and pipeline installation are being certified and billed twice. These entries cannot logically exist twice, which raises serious concerns of false certification,” he asserted.
He also noted that the DPR itself marks several components as “existing,” yet billing continues under the second funding head for similar works.
Procurement Irregularities and Tender Splitting
Highlighting alleged violations of procurement norms, Katwal claimed that the project was divided into multiple smaller tenders, each below ₹5 lakh.
“Such splitting reduces the level of scrutiny and bypasses standard tendering procedures. It is inconsistent with established procurement guidelines and financial rules,” he said.
He further cited a case where a contract estimated at ₹4.98 lakh was awarded at ₹7.26 lakh, reflecting a significant increase without recorded justification.
Concerns Over DPR Integrity
Katwal raised serious concerns about the authenticity of the Detailed Project Report (DPR), describing it as “non site-specific and largely replicated from external templates.”
“The objectives section of the DPR itself refers to the rejuvenation of Lake Hancock, which is located in Florida, USA. This alone establishes that the document is a copy-paste exercise and not a project report prepared for a local pond in Una,” Katwal alleged.
“The document also references locations outside India and even mentions a different pond in its annexures. This undermines its credibility as a technical basis for sanction,” he added.
He further pointed to discrepancies of approximately ₹33 lakh in the cost abstract, which he claimed appear to have been adjusted through manual alterations.
Demand for Immediate Action
Katwal has called for the Vigilance Bureau to secure all relevant records, including sanction files, DPRs, Measurement Books and contractor bills, and to conduct a detailed reconciliation of entries under both funding heads.
“The evidence is document-based and currently available. Any delay in action may compromise the integrity of the record,” he cautioned.
He has also recommended suspension of concerned officials during the enquiry and an independent site inspection by officers from outside the division.
Administrative Sensitivity
Given that the issue has emerged from Haroli, a politically significant constituency, the allegations are expected to draw wider administrative attention.
“This is fundamentally an issue of accountability in the use of public funds. Due process must be followed, and responsibility must be fixed where required,” Katwal said.
The State Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau has not yet issued an official response to the complaint.
