Major Drinking Water Project Cancelled Amid Procurement Controversy
Jaipur/Kota: Serious allegations of tender manipulation, administrative negligence, and procedural violations have surfaced in Rajasthan’s Public Health Engineering Department (PHED) after a major ₹208 crore drinking water project under the Central Government’s AMRUT-2.0 scheme was cancelled following irregularities in the tender process.
The controversy revolves around the strengthening of the Kota South Urban Water Supply Scheme (UWSS), a project intended to improve urban drinking water infrastructure and provide long-term relief to residents facing water supply challenges.
The project, valued at ₹20,895.26 lakh, also included a five-year operation and maintenance contract. However, instead of progressing toward implementation, the tender process has now become the center of allegations involving alleged collusion between engineers and contractors, delays in processing, and possible attempts to influence the outcome of the bidding process.
Tender Process Cancelled After Bids Were Opened
The matter came to light during the 916th meeting of the department’s Finance Committee, where officials decided to annul the tender process under provisions of the Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement (RTPP) Rules, 2013.
Technical bids for the tender (NIB No. 11/2025-26) were opened on September 12, 2025. Six major infrastructure companies participated in the process, including leading firms involved in national-level water infrastructure projects.
More Read
However, months after the bids had been opened, officials reportedly discovered that the tender advertisement had not been published in a local Kota newspaper — a mandatory requirement under Rule 43 of the RTPP Rules.
The issue allegedly surfaced only during a Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) meeting held in December 2025, raising serious questions over administrative oversight and compliance monitoring within the department.
Questions Raised Over “Delayed Discovery” of Rules Violation
Critics have questioned how such a significant procedural lapse could remain unnoticed for several months in a project involving public expenditure exceeding ₹200 crore.
More Read
According to sources familiar with departmental functioning, the delay in identifying the violation has fueled suspicions that the process may have been intentionally prolonged. Allegations suggest that officials often keep tender files pending while informal negotiations continue behind closed doors.
Insiders claim that if the tender outcome does not appear favorable to preferred contractors, technical violations are later cited to justify cancellation of the process and the issuance of fresh tenders.
While no official evidence of wrongdoing has yet been publicly established, the controversy has intensified scrutiny over procurement practices inside PHED.
Eight Corrigendum’s Issued, Yet Publication Rules Ignored
Departmental officials informed the Finance Committee that not just the original tender, but eight separate corrigendums were issued during the process.
Although these corrigendums were reportedly sent to the Department of Information and Public Relations (DIPR), officials allegedly failed to ensure their proper publication in newspapers as required under procurement norms.
The repeated procedural lapses have prompted questions about whether monitoring mechanisms inside the department were functioning effectively or whether mandatory compliance requirements were deliberately ignored.
More Read
Observers argue that projects involving essential public services such as drinking water infrastructure demand stricter transparency and oversight standards.
Officials Admit Similar Tender Cancellations in Recent Years
One of the most significant revelations during the committee meeting was the acknowledgment by senior officials that several PHED tenders had been cancelled over the last two to three years due to similar procedural irregularities.
This admission has strengthened allegations that systemic issues may exist within the department’s procurement structure.
Critics argue that repeated cancellation of large infrastructure tenders not only delays development projects but also increases project costs, affects public confidence, and disrupts delivery of essential services.
The delay in finalizing the AMRUT-2.0 project is expected to impact Kota residents who continue to face periodic water supply concerns amid rising urban demand.
Committee Orders Fresh Tender, Notices to Officials
Following the controversy, the Finance Committee has decided to completely cancel the tender process under RTPP Rule 72.
Authorities have now announced that fresh bids will be invited for the project. The committee has also directed officials to issue show-cause notices to officers considered responsible for the procedural lapses.
In addition, the department plans to introduce a compliance checklist aimed at preventing similar mistakes in future procurement processes.
However, critics argue that issuing notices alone may not be sufficient unless accountability is fixed at senior administrative levels.
Public Questions Accountability in Essential Services
The controversy has once again brought attention to governance challenges within Rajasthan’s public infrastructure and procurement systems, especially in departments responsible for essential civic services.
Public interest groups and opposition voices have demanded greater transparency, independent audits, and stricter accountability mechanisms to ensure that public welfare projects are not delayed due to administrative failures or alleged manipulation.
As the department prepares to restart the tender process, questions remain over who will ultimately be held responsible for the cancellation of a project intended to strengthen drinking water supply for thousands of residents in Kota.