LAHORE – Blatant violation of the rules and procedure in the purchase of networking, IT equipment and data centre for the Punjab Forensic Science Agency and Laboratory (PFSA) has cost Rs162.68 million to the public exchequer, TheNation has learnt.
The PFSA purchased sophisticated equipment for networking at inflated price of Rs142.13 million ($1.69 million) from a US company, RJ LEE Group, through its local agent M Ayoub Brothers.
The agency added such clauses in the agreement that relieved the company from the responsibility of providing maintenance for three years after the installation of tools, putting serious question mark on the intentions of government officials and quality of purchased equipment.
As per the agreement, the warranty period starts from the date of signing the accord, not the supply and installation of the costly equipment, giving special favour to the contractor and ignoring government’s interests. As such, the warranty expired before the installation of equipment, costing Rs18.085 million ($215,050) to public exchequer. The PFSA official did not even bother to recover liquidated Rs2.5 million ($29,285) damages from the company. The PFSA did not carry out prequalification of firms, an obligation under PC-I. It struck contract with a foreign firm but the procurement opportunity was neither advertised on international level nor on the PPRA website, violating the set procedure.
Two other contesting companies – Al Imran International and Bestial – were disqualified without any reason in the technical evaluation carried out by a committee, comprising Home Secretary, PIU-Forensic Science Agency Project Director, Forensic Consultant, Public Prosecution Department DG, representative of IT Department, Investigation SSP, Health Deputy Secretary and SO (G-II) of Finance Department.
The RJ LEE was not disqualified, though it did not deposit Rs4.29 million earnest money. As per the observation of the audit team director general, the members of technical committee did not express their independent views in evaluation … the representative of IT Department penned “as per evaluation document”, forensic consultant (now PFSA DG), “as desired’ and SO (G-II) FD “as decided by the committee”.
The RJ LEE submitted unsigned bidding document through its local representative Ayub Brothers and did not provide 10 per cent performance security from any scheduled bank. The management insisted that the performance bank warranty was obtained in the shape of letter of credit (LC) but interestingly that too expired on December 31, 2010. The items of tender documents except software did not match with performa invoice and packing list. Delivery period was neither mentioned in the agreement nor in the LC. Equipments were shipped in various lots on January 28, 29, 2011, February 2, 8, 16, 2011, March 25, 2011 and April 6, 2011. The last two consignments were delayed for 4 and 7 weeks respectively but no late delivery charges were recovered from the company. The PFSA, however, made payments to the company without obtaining financial sanction of the competent authority.
Quoting that the management of PFSA has admitted irregularity in the purchase of costly equipment from the RJ LEE, the audit team recommended evaluation of technical and financial aspects of the package.