JAIPUR: An Anti-Corruption Bureau investigation into Rajasthan’s Jal Jeevan Mission has alleged that public officials and a private contractor colluded to certify incomplete water projects as finished, enabling contracts worth nearly ₹1,500 crore and causing a reported loss of ₹187.33 crore to the state.
An FIR That Pulls a Flagship Mission Into Focus
The Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) has registered a First Information Report against three senior officials of the Public Health Engineering Department (PHED) in connection with alleged irregularities in projects executed under the Jal Jeevan Mission, the Union government’s flagship rural drinking water programme. According to the FIR, the case centres on the misuse of forged or misleading documents to secure and retain large public contracts, despite substantial portions of the work remaining incomplete.
The FIR was registered on Monday following a preliminary probe triggered by a complaint emailed to the ACB Director General in November 2023. The bureau alleges that tenders worth ₹1,493 crore were awarded on the basis of manipulated records, resulting in an estimated financial loss of ₹187.33 crore to the government. At the heart of the case is a Hyderabad-based infrastructure firm that, investigators say, falsely projected its execution capacity and work completion status with the alleged assistance of departmental officials.
Certified Cyber Crime Investigator Course Launched by Centre for Police Technology
How Incomplete Work Was Shown as Finished
Investigators say the alleged manipulation unfolded through official inspection and progress reports. During the probe, a report was initially prepared indicating that only partial work had been completed on certain projects. That assessment, according to the FIR, was later altered to show the entire scope of work as completed.
This change proved pivotal. By certifying full completion, the firm was deemed eligible to qualify for additional tenders and to continue participating in ongoing ones. The ACB alleges that commissioning processes—such as pipeline cleaning, testing, and the installation of SCADA systems used for remote monitoring and leak detection—were incomplete in several villages, even though records suggested otherwise.
Site inspections later found that key components, particularly in the Chambal–Bhilwara water supply project, were still pending despite documentation claiming full completion. The altered reports, the FIR states, helped the company avoid disqualification and potential blacklisting.
Complaints Raised, but No Action Taken
The FIR notes that concerns about the firm’s performance were raised well before the complaint reached the ACB headquarters. Several complaints were reportedly received in June 2023 flagging deficiencies in execution and compliance. Despite this, no punitive action was initiated against the contractor at the time.
Instead, investigators allege, steps were taken to protect the firm from blacklisting. Officials are accused of declaring the company eligible despite incomplete submissions, relying on affidavits that allegedly overstated bidding capacity and work completion. On the strength of these claims, the firm continued to receive contracts under the Jal Jeevan Mission, securing an “undue advantage” at public expense, according to the bureau.
Projects and Officials Under the Scanner
The investigation covers five major water supply projects across Rajasthan: Sahada–Raipur–Suwana in Bhilwara district; Khinvsar and Mundwa blocks in Nagaur; Kushalgarh–Sajjangarh block in Banswara; Fatehpur–Laxmangarh Package Two in Sikar; and Isarda Package Four in Bassi Sikrai. Together, these projects formed a significant part of the firm’s Jal Jeevan Mission portfolio.
The FIR names three PHED officers allegedly linked to the approvals and certifications: Dinesh Goyal, then Chief Engineer (Special Projects); Mahendra Prakash Soni, then Superintending Engineer in Ajmer, now retired; and Siddharth Tank, Executive Engineer in the Project Division at Mandal, Bhilwara. The bureau has alleged that their actions facilitated the acceptance of incomplete documents and the certification of unfinished work.
The ACB has framed the case around criminal breach of trust, cheating, and corruption-related provisions. Further investigation is expected to focus on document trails, financial flows, and the decision-making process that allowed the projects to be cleared despite repeated red flags.
