CBI books brother sisterinlaw of former Arunachal Pradesh CM


first_imgNew Delhi: The CBI has registered a corruption case against former Arunachal Pradesh CM Nabam Tuki’s brother Nabam Hari and others in relation to PWD contracts that were awarded to a company belonging to Hari’s wife in 2005 when Tuki was the PWD Minister.The probe agency had in December 2017 registered a Preliminary Enquiry (PE) in the matter, after the High Court of Guwahati had directed the probe agency to look into allegations of up to 11 contracts awarded to Mary Associates, run by Nabam Mary, sister-in-law of the former Arunachal Pradesh CM. Also Read – Modi formed OBC commission which earlier govts didn’t do: ShahWhile Tuki is not named in the FIR, the CBI has named his brother Hari, Mary and two other officials of the PWD in the case, alleging that contracts to construct residential buildings for Kendriya Vidyalaya in Umroi Cantonment of Shillong were awarded without following the appropriate procedure. The Central Bureau of Investigation has alleged that the accused had exploited a loophole in the procedures of awarding contracts and through Taba Tedir, then Executive Engineer(EE) and Kuru Sera, then Superintending Engineer(SE), had issued multiple work orders as a workaround to issuing a tender for the job. Also Read – Prohibitory orders lifted from Mumbai’s stir-hit Aarey ColonyAs the Arunachal Pradesh PWD followed the CPWD Manual at the time, a clause in that allowed SE-level officers to award contracts not exceeding Rs 3 lakh and EE-level officer to award contracts not more than Rs 1 lakh, without calling for a tender. The construction of the above-mentioned residential buildings was pegged at over Rs 1 crore and as a way to bypass the mandatory provision for calling a tender for such a job, Tedir and Sera divided up the job into multiple work orders not exceeding their prescribed limit under the CPWD Manual and issued them to Mary Associates. Further, the CBI has alleged that there are no records available to show the reasons as to why the works were awarded to Mary’s firm without inviting a tender. Moreover, the probe agency said that Mary’s firm had written a letter to Tedir, describing her firm as a local contractor with “good experience” in construction work, before beginning construction of Phase-I of the project. Tedir had then awarded the work orders to Mary Associates acknowledging the firm’s experience in construction work. However, the CBI has alleged that Mary Associates was, at that time, registered to run a business of electrical goods, hardware, motor parts, lubricants, and agri-equipments. It was not enlisted as a civil contractor with PWD and did not have the requisite license or expertise to execute large construction works, the agency said in its FIR.last_img