New Delhi: Months after former Delhi minister Satyendar Jain chaired a Delhi Jal Board (DJB) meeting that allegedly changed tender conditions in favour of a Hyderabad-based company for upgrading Delhi’s sewage treatment plants (STPs), the company appointed a firm linked to Jain’s long-time acquaintance and neighbour as its commission agent, the Delhi Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) told a court Wednesday. The firm was to receive 3 percent of the total billing amount.
According to ACB’s remand application, Jain chaired a meeting with DJB officials, including then Chief Executive Officer Udit Prakash Rai, on 31 August, 2021. The agency alleged that it was decided at the meeting that only IFAS Fixed Media technology would be considered for upgrading 10 sewage treatment plants.
This decision virtually left one bidder, named called Euroteck Environmental Pvt. Ltd (EEPL) for the process, and appointed Srijanhar Enterprises, managed by Vinod Chauhan’s nephew, as a commission agent on 22 December 2021. There were meetings on 21 and 23 December between the same individuals finalising the terms of the tender, the ACB further alleged.
As part of the deal, EEPL paid Rs 2.71 crore into the bank account of M/s Srijanhar Enterprises without any work, the ACB alleged in its remand application. The ACB has identified Vinod Chauhan as Jain’s neighbour, while the Enforcement Directorate, which already charged Jain and others in December last year, has identified Chauhan as a long-term acquaintance who was approached by an intermediary on behalf of EEPL for the deal.
However, the ACB did not press for police custody of Jain, the senior AAP leader appointed co-in-charge of Punjab where the party has been ruling since 2022. The move by the ACB drew sharp scrutiny and questions from the party chief, Arvind Kejriwal, who questioned the necessity of Jain’s arrest if his interrogation was not required.
The ACB also alleged that Jain rejected the Delhi Jal Board chief engineer’s proposal to relax the oxygen transfer efficiency requirement for equipment, thereby encouraging broader competition among bidders for the sewage treatment plant.
This design, the ACB alleges, was made due to a “coordinated arrangement” between DJB officials, including the former CEO Udit Prakash Rai and EEPL’s proprietor Raj Kumar Kurra, to alter tender terms for a bribe. According to the ACB, Rai was allegedly paid a bribe of Rs 1.52 crore routed through banking channels by one A.N. Enterprises, managed by Nagendra Yadav.
The ACB told the court that Yadav acted as an “intermediary” between DJB officials and EEPL representatives. “KVNS Rao (Euroteck) handed the letter to Nagendra Yadav, who subsequently delivered it to the office of Satyendar Jain. Thereafter, Sh. Satyendar Kumar Jain, directed Ankit Srivastava (a contractual consultant in DJB), to coordinate with Sh. KVNS Rao regarding the meeting after sharing the visiting card of Sh. KVNS Rao. The screenshot of the chat between Sh. K.V.N.S. Rao and Sh. Ankit Shrivastav was recovered from the mobile phone of Sh. K.V.N.S. Rao,” the ACB alleged in the remand application.
As part of the plan, the meeting took place on 31 August, 2021, and subsequently on 21 and 23 December that year, during which fresh terms of reference were prepared, calling for only IFAS fixed media for the upgradation of STPs, the ACB alleged.
The ACB sought a two-day remand of one Ankit Srivastava, who was working as a consultant with DJB at the time, to question him about the reasons for arranging such meetings between EEPL and Jain, along with senior DJB officials.
The ACB further accused Jain of making “arbitrary” decisions, such as altering the original technical proposal for the augmentation of the Rohini STP from 15 MGD to 25 MGD and instead ordering an upgrade to 30 MGD, without any technical recommendation or feasibility study.
During the court proceedings, Jain argued that he was not a “subject matter expert”, and merely relied on the technical recommendations and notings made by DJB officers, including engineers, and that his decisions cannot be faulted. Moreover, he also argued that neither the Enforcement Directorate not the ACB have identified any bribe or commission traced “directly” to him.
Similarly, the ACB alleged that the Rohini and Narela STPs were included in the project, while the Okhla Phase-V STP was excluded, resulting in an estimated escalation of Rs 123 crore. “These arbitrary decisions of the minister were allegedly taken without adequate technical justification,” the ACB alleged in the remand application.
(Edited by Nardeep Singh Dahiya)
Also Read: AAP leader Satyendar Jain arrested by anti-corruption branch in Delhi Jal Board bribery case