Bengaluru Public Works Explorer Koramangala

← All cases

Case file · KP6-151-16-000019

set aside

Billed quantity above Schedule B

KP6-151-16-000019 · confidence low · priority score 49.6/100 (ranking aid, not a judgement)

This project was reviewed and set aside: every issue was explained, was an artefact, or rests only on low-confidence evidence

Project

Comprehensive Development of roads by providing asphalting drains and foorpaths in ward no 151 and 173 in BTM Layout Division

Job 151-16-000019 · Roads, drains & footpaths (combined) · location not stated · Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Contractor: Sri. Ramaiah Lokesh

Project page with every fact and source →

What was promised

Contract / work-order value
not read (unknown)
Estimate
—
Work order
—
Stipulated completion
—

What happened

Paid (gross / net)
₹5.79 Cr / ₹5.35 Cr
Bills
6 · 10 Feb 2017 → 05 Feb 2018
Final bill
none recorded
Status
Final bill submitted, not yet paid
Pending bills
1 bill(s) not paid (₹1); at: EE (Acts. Supdt.) ×1

Why this case deserves follow-up

Examined and set aside on this project:

  • quantity above plan (low confidence): billed 3,605.57 vs plan 2,310.32 rests on a sum of running-bill abstracts, not on a cumulative or final figure; not reliable enough to present.
  • document reuse (explained): the shared work order / agreement is one package contract worth ₹7.50 Cr; payments on this job and 151-16-000025 total ₹7.48 Cr (100% of it), consistent with one contract booked under several job codes.

Possible legitimate explanations

  • An approved deviation / work slip increased the quantity.
  • The approval exists on paper but was not uploaded to IFMS (IFMS attachments are not a complete record).
  • A second installation location was added to the work.
  • An OCR misreading of one figure (each row passed quantity × rate = amount, which makes this unlikely).

What would resolve it

  • Approved deviation statement / work slip covering the item
  • Supplementary Schedule B
  • MB pages for the item
  • Site inspection counting installed units

Questions an investigator could ask

  1. Was the increase of 'h a hydrostatic paver finisher Cum mises Nike Thousand Niae,' from 2,310.32 to 3,605.57 cum on job 151-16-000019 approved through a deviation statement or work slip? If so, give the approval number, date and approving authority.
  2. Which MB pages record the measurement of the additional 1,295.25 cum?
  3. Where were the additional units installed?
  4. Was the additional quantity paid at the tendered rate or a revised rate?

Specific records to request (RTI)

  1. Approved deviation statement / work slip / supplementary Schedule B covering 'h a hydrostatic paver finisher Cum mises Nike Thousand Niae,' — job 151-16-000019; Schedule B quantity 2,310.32, billed 3,605.57 cum @ ₹9,900.00. Why: Shows whether the extra quantity was approved before payment.
  2. Measurement-book pages recording this item — job 151-16-000019; 3,605.57 cum cumulative. Why: Shows where and when the additional units were measured.

Evidence

    IFMS work bills for this job: 65615, 65616, 65617, 81267, 81268, 113974, 231956

    Investigation lead, not an accusation. Every statement on this page is generated from the published case data (JSON).