The charge sheet filed by the Authority in the special court states that the then project officer Chaudhary, four members of the consulting company should be punished collectively, and the head of CAMC and the project manager should also be punished collectively, with fines and imprisonment.
We use Google Cloud Translation Services. Google requires we provide the following disclaimer relating to use of this service:
This service may contain translations powered by Google. Google disclaims all warranties related to the translations, expressed or implied, including any warranties of accuracy, reliability, and any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and noninfringement.
A corruption case has been filed against 21 individuals and two companies, including former Secretary Kedar Bahadur Adhikari and three former Directors General of the Civil Aviation Authority, Sanjeev Gautam, Rajan Pokharel and Pradeep Adhikari, on charges of irregularities in the selection of consultants for the construction of the Pokhara Regional International Airport.
While the case related to the corruption case related to the cost determination and contract agreement for the construction of the airport is pending in the special court, the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority has filed a second case against the then Secretary and three former Directors General, including the then Secretary, Adhikari and three former Directors General, as defendants on charges of corruption in the selection of consultants for the project.
The Commission on Sunday filed a case against the then Secretary of the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation, the then Directors General Gautam and Pokharel, the then Chief and Director of the project and later Director General Adhikari, and the head of the Chinese contractor company CAMC, Wang Bo, as defendants on charges of corruption in the selection of consultants.
According to CIAA spokesperson Suresh Neupane, a fine of Rs 461.584 million has been imposed on the defendants, along with recovery of the embezzled amount from the accused and imprisonment. The then Secretary Adhikari, who was made the defendant, is the Chief Secretary of the Rastriya Prajatantra Party after retiring from government service.
The CIAA had earlier filed a special case on 21 Mangsir 2082 against 56 people, including 5 former ministers, 9 former secretaries and a former registrar of the Supreme Court, alleging that the cost of the airport construction was increased by preparing a master plan and handing it over to a Chinese company. The case is pending in the special court. The special court has sought bail from Director General Adhikari, who was made the defendant in this case, and he is in jail awaiting trial in a corruption case related to the construction of the Nalinchok Heliport in Bhaktapur.
Three and a half months after the first case was filed, the CIAA has filed a second case against the then Secretary of the Ministry of Tourism and three former Directors General in the Pokhara International Airport Project consultant selection case.
According to the CIAA, the then Secretary Adhikari, three former Directors General Gautam, Pokharel and Adhikari (defendants as the then Project Chief and Director), the then Deputy Director General Mahendra Singh Rawal, the then Director Dhruvdas Bhochhibhya (his wife Yamunadevi Shrestha in Bigo's case since he is deceased), the then Project Chief Baburam Poudel, the then Deputy Director Prabin Neupane, the then Manager Chandmala Shrestha, the then Project Chief Binesh Munkarmi, the then Senior Accounts Officer Narendra Raj Sainju, the then Accounts Officer and Deputy Manager Pramod Nepal, the then Senior Accounts Officer and Deputy Manager Sabin Phuyal, the then Deputy Manager of the Project Himjyoti Shrestha, and the then Project Officer Rajaram Chaudhary have been made defendants. Similarly, the project's consultant company ERMC and its representatives Yama Bahadur Bhandari, Uddhav Raj Chaulagain, Somendra Raj Joshi and Pramod Dawadi, construction company CAMC chief Wang Bo and the company's project manager Yang Zhiyang have also been made defendants and a demand for punishment has been made.
The Authority has demanded fines, recovery of the embezzled amount and imprisonment for the then Secretary Adhikari, the then Director General Pokharel and Adhikari, the then Deputy Director Neupane, the then Project Chief Munkarmi, and the then Manager Chandmala Shrestha. The charge sheet filed by the Authority in the special court states that the then Project Officer Chaudhary and four people from the consultant company should be fined and imprisoned collectively, and the head of CAMC and the project manager should also be fined and imprisoned collectively. The remaining others have been asked to pay different amounts based on their roles and responsibilities. The Authority's indictment states that the Authority has misappropriated the Authority's property in a prima facie manner by allocating additional budget for consultant expenses contrary to the cost estimate and agreement in which the cost estimate was increased illegally, with ill intent, and with a plan of collusion and collusion. The Authority claims that the investigation revealed that the amount allocated for consultancy expenses in the contract agreement for the
project was increased to 4.742 million US dollars in collusion. For this, the consultant was selected in collusion and the original agreement stated that the VAT registration certificate, permanent account registration number certificate and tax payment certificate were not required based on the consultant's qualifications, and it was made mandatory to select a specific consultant company, and the letter of intent was requested by limiting it to international bidding for contracts above 30 million.
‘The decision regarding the appointment and the start of the procurement process before the procurement process of consultancy services by conducting only national-level competition in violation of the public procurement regulations and the airport construction procurement agreement, without carrying out the work included in the construction contract as per the contract, confirms that the work included in the contract was carried out in an unnaturally high cost estimate,’ the indictment filed by the Authority specifically states.
China had decided on 26 Mangsir 2068 to proceed with the project directly and for this, the cost would be 286.526 million dollars (excluding taxes). After a dispute over the decision to award the contract directly to a Chinese contractor, the Authority formed a committee under the coordination of Board of Directors member Manoj Karki to review the cost of CAMC. The committee also prepared a cost estimate of 169.697 thousand US dollars including 3 percent 'contingency' and 13 percent VAT, which was approved by the board and bids were invited.
After 10 companies submitted bids, the Authority board opened a financial proposal on 31 Asad 2069 in violation of the Public Procurement Act, CAMC bid 305.123 million dollars and this bid was much more expensive than the initial study, according to the charge sheet filed by the Authority in the special court.
The case of selecting a consultant for the project reached the court on Sunday without resolving the issue of increasing the cost through collusion. According to the Authority, the cost estimate was approved on 2 Jestha 2069 with the amount of consultant appointment at 2.8 million dollars excluding VAT. However, it was found that the amount mentioned in the agreement under the heading of consultancy appointment was spent illegally, and the Director General approved a cost estimate of 503.4 million rupees 40 thousand 696 rupees under the heading of consultancy starting from 17 Bhadra 2073.
The board of directors led by the Tourism Secretary approved the increased consultancy fee on 8 Mangsir 2074 as a multi-year program. After the amount was approved, the Authority signed an agreement with ERMC/A Nut/Slate (JV) for 428.9 million rupees 36 thousand 700 rupees including VAT on 24 Baisakh 2075, and so far the Authority has paid 406.8 million rupees 26 thousand 568 rupees.
Of the amount of compensation determined, the Authority has also determined a total of Rs 461.584 crore for causing loss and misuse of the loan amount received from the government by spending it contrary to the agreement, and Rs 372 million for creating liability for the Authority by embezzling funds.
