BMC Council Meeting Marred by Fund Diversion Row

A controversy erupted at the Bhopal Municipal Corporation (BMC) Council meeting on Wednesday over the alleged diversion of funds meant for economically weaker sections (EWS) from the 12 Number Stop housing project to the stalled Baghmugalia Housing for All (HFA) project.

The issue was raised by leader of opposition Shabista Zaki, who questioned the corporation's handling of funds meant for housing for economically weaker sections (EWS). MiC member Chhaya Thakur admitted that corporation officials had failed to provide her with adequate information, saying that she had been frustrated for four years.

The Baghmugalia HFA project was launched in 2019, with the corporation issuing a work order to M/s Gulshan Rai Jain (Second) on February 4, 2019. The project envisaged 768 housing units comprising 336 EWS, 288 LIG, and 144 MIG units and was scheduled for completion in 2022. However, the contractor sought extensions nearly four times and even then failed to complete the project.

The corporation eventually terminated the contract on August 29, 2024, citing violation of contractual conditions, and forfeited the firm's performance security. A new contractor, M/s Pelji Ratna Sorathia Infra Pvt Ltd, was assigned to complete the stalled Baghmugalia project on September 19, 2024. While the contractor was assigned 768 unfinished housing units, only 432 units were completed.

According to corporation records, the expenditure was booked under Project No. 12, linked to the 12 Number Stop project. BMC records further indicate that two blocks meant for EWS beneficiaries under Project No. 12 were surrendered to the Urban Administration and Housing Department (UADD). The funds allocated for these blocks were subsequently added to the Baghmugalia project's balance, effectively using Project No. 12 funds for construction at Baghmugalia.

MiC member Thakur said the decision was taken after Baghmugalia allottees repeatedly protested at the corporation headquarters, Collectorate, and Chief Minister's residence. It claimed the protests were affecting the government's image and that the fund adjustment was made after approval from the Mayor-in-Council.

The controversy has raised questions about the handling of funds meant for economically weaker sections (EWS) and the transparency of the corporation's decision-making process. The opposition has demanded clarity on the fund diversion and the actions taken by the corporation.

The BMC has been facing criticism over its handling of housing projects, and this controversy is likely to add to the concerns. The corporation needs to provide clear answers to the questions raised by the opposition and ensure that the funds meant for EWS are utilized effectively.

In conclusion, the controversy over the alleged diversion of funds at the BMC Council meeting highlights the need for transparency and accountability in the corporation's decision-making process. The corporation must ensure that the funds meant for economically weaker sections (EWS) are utilized effectively and that the interests of the beneficiaries are protected.