Bhubaneswar: After its failure to execute them, the state government has dropped 62 rural road projects worth Rs 174.34 crore sanctioned under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY) during first two phases.
The state government has submitted two different proposals to the Union Rural Development Ministry for shelving the road projects sanctioned in different financial years from 2000-01 under PMGSY-I & PMGSY-II, official sources said.
Out of 62 projects, some progress has been made in 20 rural roads and then stopped due to various reasons including non-diversion of forest land. No progress has been made against the remaining 42 projects which have since been dropped.
The government has incurred expenditure to the tune of Rs 45.10 crore for these projects remaining idle for several years. Interestingly, even though not a single metre of road has been constructed in the 42 projects, the executive engineers have shown expenditure of nearly Rs 7 crore against these projects.
For example, Nuapatana-Tungamal PMGSY project in Deogarh district was approved in 2010-11 with an estimated cost of Rs 539.99 lakh. Though there was zero progress in the construction work, the government has spent Rs 216.36 lakh for execution of the project.
Similarly, Sindhabeda-Chedenga rural road project was sanctioned in 2008-09 at a cost of Rs 4.86 crore. In this project too, the government has made an expenditure of Rs 212.84 lakh without constructing a single metre.
PMGSY chief engineer Chandra Mouli Patnaik has recently written to all executive engineers under the rural works divisions asking them not to use further fund for the dropped projects.
“No further expenditure can be made in this package without prior approval of the undersigned. The concerned executive engineer will be held personally responsible for any deviation on this,” Patnaik said in his letter.
While seeking comment on this, Patnaik said, “Maximum number of projects have been dropped due to non-diversion of forest land. In some cases, some parts of the road projects have been completed while the remainder cannot be taken up due to forest land.”
However, the chief engineer did not say anything on the expenditure incurred without any physical progress. The concerned executive engineer can better comment on this, he added.
Biswa Bhusan Mohapatra, OP
