bmc fails to recover rs 4.37 lakh in fines

penalties were levied on mtnl and rel in may after they reportedly dug up roads without prior bmc permission



the yearly budget of the brihanmumbai municipal corporation (bmc) is in excess of rs 12,000 crore, but officials within the bmc have been tardy in collecting fines owed by various entities, which run into a few lakhs. bmc had issued letters to mahanagar telephone nigam limited (mtnl) and reliance energy ltd (rel) in may and july, asking them to cough up penalties because they allegedly excavated a road in andheri (e) without prior permissions from the bmc. mtnl had to pay over rs 4 lakh, while rel owes rs 16,000 to the civic authorities, according to a right to information (rti) reply issued to social worker ravi nair, a resident of chimatpada in andheri (e). the rti reply states that till date, the bmc has not collected the money from either party. says nair, "on may 20, i was passing though ganesh nagar road in chimatpada and found some people digging up the road. i stopped there and demanded a copy of the permission order from them, but the supervisor refused and told me to inform the bmc. i then filed a police complaint regarding the matter and informed the bmc regarding the issue." on may 23, the bmc issued a letter to mtnl, stating that they had excavated the stretch on ganesh nagar road without the prior permission of the municipal corporation of greater mumbai (mcgm); it was also stated that there was no responsible officer at the site and mtnl therefore was directed to pay rs 4,21,740 as penalty. after a similar incident occurred near chimatpada in july, nair says he again informed the bmc, after which the bmc sent a penalty letter to rel for not obtaining mcgm permission and asked them to pay a fine of rs 16,351. but, the twist in the tale came when through his rti petition, nair found that the bmc had not collected the moneys owed to it, nor had it deducted the sums owed from the deposits of the two companies. "i was shocked to see the answer in the rti that the bmc hasn't yet collected the fine, nor has it deducted the amount from their deposits. it was the responsibility of the ward officer to take immediate action, but we think he is hand-in-glove with the companies, which is why the fines have not been recovered," added nair. when questioned on the issue, assistant municipal commissioner (amc) ranjit dhakane of k (e) ward said action would be taken soon. "i have already informed the concerned official regarding this issue and action will be taken soon," dhakane said. when asked about the reason for the delay in collecting the fines, he said, "there was some computer problem in the ward office and this was the reason for the delay." m_chirag@dnaindia.netthe dug-up road at chimatpada, andheri (e) - chirag madia

RTI nails BMC’s half-hearted recovery of dues from companies

If the letter stated that the amount will be recovered within three days, then why have they still not recovered it...
A Right to Information (RTI) application has exposed the lackadaisical attitude of the Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corpo-ration (BMC) for not recovering their dues, in the form of penalty charges imposed on Reliance Energy and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL) for the illegal excavation of a trench at Chimatpada Road in Andheri.Ravi Nair, a volunteer of AGNI from the K-East Ward had notified the trench (road digging) officer of illegal excavation on the roads by these companies. He then filed an RTI application demanding the documents for the recovery of dues for the illegal excavation on the roads by the companies. Nair demanded photocopies of the debit/sap voucher confirming that BMC has recovered the penalty amount from Reliance Energy in the stipulated time period for recovering the same, after issuing the letter under the Right to Information Act. In its response, the BMC has stated that letters have already been sent to MTNL Ltd. and Reliance Energy and the same will be recovered from the amount which the companies had deposited with BMC in due course.The BMC has issued a letter to Reliance Energy and MTNL for paying the penalty amounting to Rs. 16,351 from Reliance Energy Limited and Rs. 4,21,740 from MTNL. But Nair alleges that the BMC has not recovered these dues. "The dues are still pending. I have been filing the RTI applications right from the month of May, but still they have not provided the documents about the recovery of penalty," said Nair.He alleges that the penalty was supposed to be recovered within three days of issuing the letter to the companies, failing in which the amount should have been recovered from the deposit of the companies. But the Corporation has still not recovered their dues. "If the letter stated that the amount will be recovered within three days, then why have they still not recovered it?" asks Nair. R.B. Dhakane, the Assistant Municipal Commissioner (K East) Ward was not available for comment.

BMC plays ping-pong with RTI appellants

Citizens have complained to Commissioner Phatak about Ward Officer Ranjit Dhakne delaying RTI hearings, citing reasons of meetings with higher-ups

Activists from K/ East ward are fed up of the administrative irregularity in attending to appellants seeking details under Right to Information (RTI) Act. Informs James John, AGNI (Association for Governance and Networking in India) member and coordinator for K/ East ward, “The Municipal Commissioner has fixed Wednesdays between 3 p m and 5 p m as the appeal timings under the RTI Act 2005. Though this time is reserved specifically for RTIs first appeal hearings, it is not being followed, and appellants are turned back, as the Ward Officer has either gone for some urgent meetings or because the Additional Municipal Commissioners have summoned them.” So agitated are the citizens that they have written to Municipal Commissioner Dr Jairaj Pathak complaining about Ward Officer Ranjit Dhakne leaving citizens in a lurch for a meeting with Additional Municipal Commissioner R A Rajeev. Says John, “They must be made to compensate to appellants and the Ward Officer must be reprimanded.” Says Samiullah Chaudhary of Marol, “I am a security guard, and almost lost my job waiting for Ward Officer Dhakne, who didn’t turn up.” Says an angry Ravi Nair, “We are not fools to wait for hours, and go back without an answer, because the ward officer doesn’t spare us time. I had to come here thrice for my appeal to be heard.”Says a senior official, “Ward officers cannot do much, when higher-ups call them. There should be a stricture that no meetings are to be attended during appeals. We would be more than pleased to follow it.”Responds Ranjit Dhakne, “We have to go if the meetings are urgent. We are not delaying RTI hearings intentionally, to skip the appeals. If there’s an important issue that needs immediate attention, we have to look into it.” Affirms Commissioner Phatak, “Ward officers must be present for the appeals, unless they have some urgent meetings to attend.” virat.singh@timesgroup.comTake this forwardAdvises RTI activist Advocate Vivekanand Gupta, “If an appeal is not heard within 45 days, one can lodge a complaint with the State Public Information Officer (PIO). Appellate authorities never bother to inform appellants, if they are unable to conduct the appeal. The Municipal Commissioner must issue a circular asking all senior officials to avoid any meetings during the appeal timings.”

They fought BMC with info power

W FOR VICTORY: Yes, for residents of Chimatpada in Andheri (E), ‘victory’ starts with ‘w’; they had to wait for nearly six years, and really slug it out with the BMC, before they got water in their taps

Mumbai: For five years, the bestcase scenario for residents of Chimatpada in Andheri (East) was a trickle of water at their homes; and, often, there would be none at all. All their missives to the ward office just added to the heap of files. But all that changed in eight months, thanks to the determination of two men, which forced the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation to give 25,000-odd residents of this neighbourhood access to good drinking water that, many believed, was one of their most basic rights. The first letters sent by Chimatpada resident Ravi Nair and local AGNI activist James John failed to get officials moving. But, in the process, they learnt that the BMC had already allotted Rs 1.12 crore for a cross-connection from a main line from which pipes of a bigger diameter would be laid to Chimatpada. But all progress, unfortunately for residents of Chimatpada, was evident only on paper. “The BMC initially said they could not lay pipes because the traffic department was not allowing them to dig the road,’’ Nair said. So he did the next logical thing; he pursued the case with officials of the traffic department and learnt that verbal permission was given to the BMC some time back. An entire area was, therefore, going dry because the BMC never bothered to follow up on the permission with the traffic department. “It was just a matter of procuring this piece of paper for permission. And, when we produced the traffic department’s reply to the BMC, they immediately started the work,’’ John said. It took just two letters and three applications under the Right To Information Act for the pipeline to become operational, he added. But the battle was far from over, they learnt soon. The local corporator, who inaugurated the pipeline, milked the issue, claiming through party hoardings that it was his party that had paid for the work that brought water to residents’ homes. This claim, too, was exposed following a series of RTI applications that revealed that the work was carried out using money from the BMC budget. Nair and John, however, now have another battle on their hands; they are nowtrying to get details of another project that was to augment water supply to Marol. “The BMC, this time, has passed the buck on to the MMRDA and agencies that own the underground utilities,’’ John said, promising that the battle was very much on.

One question saves lakhs from going down the drain...

The man who saved lakhs

J B Nagar resident Ashok Pai asked to see the tender for sewage connection in LACC meet; residents were unaware that they were not liable to pay the Rs 20,000 per society that corporator and BMC official demanded for the work I knew that under Section 231 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, soci- eties are not responsi- ble to pay for the first time — it is the BMC’s duty to pay”
When a J B Nagar resident asked to see a tender copy during a Local Area Citizen Committee (LACC) meeting, he didn’t realise he was saving his society and 15 others from shelling out at least Rs 20,000 each, to connect their sewage drains to the main municipal sewage lines.
In November 2006, the BMC laid sewage lines on Kanti Nagar Road, J B Nagar, to connect the septic tanks of 16 cooperative societies, and the project cost was Rs 1.13 crore, which also included two similar projects at Wireless Road and Valenkanni Road.
However, while the ninemonth project inched forward, an LACC meeting was called recently to appeal to all cooperative societies to pay Rs 20,000 per society, to benefit from the newly-laid sewage line.
Corporator Subhash Sawant, in the presence of BMC Sub-en gineer Vishwas Kale, almost convinced society members to pay the sum for connecting the lines. However, 42-year-old Ashok Pai of Riddhi-Siddhi Ratna cooperative housing society was not convinced, and asked, “Can you show the tender copy for the 1.3 crore project to me?” The meeting was halted and Pai promised that the tender copy would be provided to him in the next meeting.
The next day itself, the civic body started connecting the sewage lines, without any money being paid by the societies.
“In the meeting held with the BMC officials and corporator, we asked why the sewage line was not connected to building. The BMC official said that for this, each society had to pay Rs 20,000 as “road opening charges”. “But I asked for a copy of the tender, because I knew that under Section 231 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, societies are not responsible to pay for the first time — it is the BMC’s duty to pay it. Then onwards, if any work is carried out, the society has to bear all expenses. The next day, the work started and one asked us to pay the expenses,” remembered Pai. “I was happy that one question saved lakhs of rupees, which might have gone to the BMC officials and the corporator.” When contacted, a BMC official said on condition of anonymity, “It was our mistake that we demanded the amount from the societies. I was unaware about the Act.” When a J B Nagar resident asked to see a tender copy dur- ing a Local Area Citizen Com- mittee (LACC) meeting, he did- n’t realise he was saving his so- ciety and 15 others from shelling out at least Rs 20,000 each, to connect their sewage drains to the main municipal sewage lines. In November 2006, the BMC laid sewage lines on Kanti Na- gar Road, J B Nagar, to connect the septic tanks of 16 coopera- tive societies, and the project cost was Rs 1.13 crore, which also included two similar proj- ects at Wireless Road and Valenkanni Road. However, while the nine- month project inched forward, an LACC meeting was called re- cently to appeal to all coopera- tive societies to pay Rs 20,000 per society, to benefit from the newly-laid sewage line. Corporator Subhash Sawant, in the presence of BMC Sub-en- gineer Vishwas Kale, almost convinced society members to pay the sum for connecting the lines. However, 42-year-old Ashok Pai of Riddhi-Siddhi Rat- na cooperative housing society was not convinced, and asked, “Can you show the tender copy for the 1.3 crore project to me?” The meeting was halted and Pai promised that the tender copy would be provided to him in the next meeting. The next day itself, the civic body started connecting the sewage lines, without any mon- ey being paid by the societies. “In the meeting held with the BMC officials and corporator, we asked why the sewage line was not connected to building. The BMC official said that for this, each society had to pay Rs 20,000 as “road opening charges”. “But I asked for a copy of the tender, because I knew that under Section 231 of the Mumbai Municipal Corpora- tion Act, societies are not re- sponsible to pay for the first time — it is the BMC’s duty to pay it. Then onwards, if any work is carried out, the society has to bear all expenses. The next day, the work started and one asked us to pay the ex- penses,” remembered Pai. “I was happy that one question saved lakhs of rupees, which might have gone to the BMC of- ficials and the corporator.” When contacted, a BMC offi- cial said on condition of anonymity, “It was our mistake that we demanded the amount from the societies. I was un- aware about the Act.”