The Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) has issued over 500 tenders within a mere fortnight following the declaration of the Lok Sabha election results. The civic body has justified this flurry of activity, citing the urgent nature of most works. However, this rapid tender issuance has drawn significant criticism from activists and political parties, who allege mismanagement and a lack of transparency in the process.
The PMC’s actions are seen as an attempt to expedite projects before the implementation of the model code of conduct for the upcoming state assembly elections. This perceived haste has prompted the Shiv Sena (UBT) to stage a protest in front of the PMC headquarters, expressing their discontent with the administration’s approach.
Activists argue that the civic body had previously engaged in a similar rush to issue tenders before the code of conduct came into effect in February. They claim that many tenders were issued to ensure budgetary allocations were utilised before the financial year ended on March 31, 2024. The current wave of tenders, they allege, is a repeat of this strategy.
A significant portion of the tenders was issued by ward offices and departments such as electrical, roads, municipal zones, gardens, drainage, water supply, solid waste management, and the municipal medical college. This wide-ranging issuance has raised questions about the administrative efficiency and the true urgency of these projects.
In March, the then PMC administrator, Vikram Kumar, presented a substantially increased budget of ₹11,601 crore for the 2024-25 financial year, a marked rise from ₹9,515 crore in the previous fiscal year. The administration is banking on financial aid of ₹2,000 crore from the state and central governments to support this ambitious budget. Notably, this marks the first time the municipal budget has exceeded the ₹10,000 crore threshold.
The PMC’s rapid tender issuance is perceived by critics as a strategy to lock in financial commitments before the election code of conduct restricts such activities. This has led to allegations of hasty and possibly imprudent financial management, with concerns that the volume of tenders may compromise the quality and oversight of the projects.
The civic body’s justification for the urgent issuance of tenders includes the need to avoid the loss of allocated funds and to ensure timely completion of critical infrastructure projects. However, the optics of this rush have not been favourable, as it has spurred public and political scepticism.
The PMC’s decision to issue 500 tenders in a short span has sparked significant controversy. The civic body’s intentions, while aimed at expediting development works, have been overshadowed by allegations of mismanagement and strategic financial manoeuvring. As the city braces for the state assembly elections, the efficacy and transparency of the PMC’s actions will remain under close scrutiny.
