While responding to Parliament's Public Accounts Committee (PAC) query on the "inordinate delay" in approaching the Environment Ministry for getting clearance, the Urban Development Ministry said the delay was beyond the control of DDA as several agencies like the Organising Committee, Yamuna Standing Committee, Central Water Commission, Uttar Pradesh government and Central Pollution Control Board were involved and had to be approached in the process.
The Urban Development Ministry supervised and monitored the work of CPWD in construction of nine stadium of the Sports Authority of India and the Big Bore Shooting Range at Kaderpur.
It also, through DDA, was responsible for the construction of several stadia and the development of the Games Village near Akshardham Temple. With the ministry silent on various issues in its reply, the PAC has now asked it to explain whether it had initially targeted 5009 rooms at Vasant Kunj whereas finally around 1200 rooms were delivered.
The PAC, headed by BJP leader Murli Manohar Joshi will question ministry officials on Monday based on the CAG report on the Games tabled in Parliament last year.
On the question of "undue favour" shown to Emaar MGF in pre-qualification and technical qualification, the ministry said that since the bid submitted by DLF ltd was conditional, it was outrightly rejected.
It said conditional bid is never accepted by DDA and the bid of Emaar MGF was not conditional or deficient, it was declared successful.
On the issue of non-verification of designs, quality and quantity, the committee was informed that the company ( G L Events Services) had submitted the design and paid the required fee for proof checking to IIT-Delhi.
Since a lot of time was being taken by IIT, the agency was permitted to erect the structure to meet the deadline. The ministry said that it has been established that the structures erected by the company were "structurally safe".
But the PAC now wants the ministry to explain the mismatch as though the structures were structurally safe, they were not as per the design requirements in the Indian context and were rejected by IIT Delhi.
Moreover, the contractor did not supply the material as per specifications.