Bengaluru Public Works Explorer Koramangala

← All cases

Case file · KP6-307-19-000009

set aside

Billed quantity above Schedule B

KP6-307-19-000009 · confidence low · priority score 25.5/100 (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

Construction of parallel Drain to SWD K-100 by laying RCC hume Pipes all along the Koramangala 80 feet Road from Sony World Junction via Maharaja Signal to Belanduru lake and othe area alternate drains for carrying the excess water of Koramangala and adjacent areas to Bellandur lake

Job 307-19-000009 · Drains & storm-water · 80 Feet Road; Maharaja Signal; 80Feet Road · Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Contractor: H D INFRASTRUCTURES · paid to, per IFMS bills: Civil Quality Consultants and Engineers Pro Smt. Mamatha K N ₹29.99 L (2019-03-08 → 2019-03-08); H D INFRASTRUCTURES ₹23.61 Cr (2019-05-27 → 2021-07-15); M/s. Sapience Consultants and Engineers ₹4.60 L (2020-06-10 → 2020-06-10); M/s Civil Tech Labs Pro Sri Basavaraj K ₹15.06 L (2020-11-24 → 2021-03-18)

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)
₹24.11 Cr / ₹22.63 Cr
Bills
11 · 24 Apr 2019 → 14 Sep 2021
Final bill
08 Mar 2019
Status
Completed (final bill)
Extensions of time
1 extension-of-time order(s): to 2020-09-30
Pending bills
1 bill(s) not paid (₹0); at: ? ×1

Why this case deserves follow-up

Examined and set aside on this project:

  • quantity above plan (low confidence): billed 150 vs plan 100 rests on a sum of running-bill abstracts, not on a cumulative or final figure; not reliable enough to present.
  • quantity above plan (low confidence): billed 967.85 vs plan 738.05 rests on a sum of running-bill abstracts, not on a cumulative or final figure; not reliable enough to present.

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 'achine mixed, concrete laid in layers not exceeding cms. cum' from 738.05 to 967.85 cum on job 307-19-000009 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 229.8 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 'achine mixed, concrete laid in layers not exceeding cms. cum' — job 307-19-000009; Schedule B quantity 738.05, billed 967.85 cum @ ₹4,500.00. Why: Shows whether the extra quantity was approved before payment.
  2. Measurement-book pages recording this item — job 307-19-000009; 967.85 cum cumulative. Why: Shows where and when the additional units were measured.

Evidence

    IFMS work bills for this job: 235237, 249400, 262325, 312848, 341977, 343123, 371613, 390736, 410790, 412452, 444314, 719613

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