A major controversy has surfaced around a high-value public works project in Uttar Pradesh after serious irregularities were flagged in the tender process of a ₹288.63-crore road widening project in Sitapur. Construction firm Sobti Infratech Limited, which participated in the bidding process, has come under scrutiny for allegedly submitting false and misleading experience certificates to qualify for the tender. Preliminary verification has revealed significant discrepancies in the documents submitted, prompting the matter to be escalated beyond the local level for a wider administrative probe.
The issue came to light following a formal complaint filed during the tender evaluation stage, alleging that Sobti Infratech had claimed prior experience under the CM Grid urban infrastructure scheme to establish eligibility for the Sitapur project. The complaint asserted that the firm had no direct association with the cited project, raising concerns over the authenticity of the documents attached with its bid.
Certified Cyber Crime Investigator Course Launched by Centre for Police Technology
Experience claim found questionable
During the verification process, it emerged that the experience certificate submitted by the firm referred to work allegedly executed under the first phase of the CM Grid scheme in Bareilly. However, a review of official records reportedly showed that the work cited by Sobti Infratech had, in fact, been awarded to a different firm. This contradiction triggered further scrutiny, leading to the conclusion that the experience claim was misleading and unsupported by factual records.
Following internal verification, a detailed report was prepared and forwarded to the Sitapur unit of the Public Works Department, flagging the inconsistencies and advising further action in accordance with tender norms. The findings raised serious concerns about whether the firm attempted to misrepresent its credentials to gain entry into a high-value infrastructure project.
Matter reaches government level
Once the discrepancies were confirmed, the issue did not remain confined to departmental correspondence. Through administrative channels, the matter was escalated to the government level, where a comprehensive inquiry is now expected to determine the extent of the alleged misrepresentation. Authorities are reportedly examining not only the disputed experience certificate but also other supporting documents submitted during the tender process.
The episode has once again drawn attention to the vulnerabilities in tender verification mechanisms, especially in large infrastructure projects where experience credentials play a decisive role. Experts note that manipulation of eligibility documents can undermine fair competition and compromise project quality, besides putting public funds at risk.
Earlier projects also under review
The controversy surrounding Sobti Infratech has gained further significance because the firm has previously secured multi-crore contracts under the Bareilly Smart City initiative. These projects included major road development works and urban beautification components. In light of the current allegations, there is growing demand for a closer technical and financial review of the firm’s earlier government-funded projects as well.
Industry observers point out that when questions arise over a company’s experience claims, it becomes necessary to reassess its past contracts to ensure compliance with contractual terms and quality benchmarks. The present case, they argue, cannot be treated as an isolated tender dispute.
CM Grid scheme context
Investigators have also noted that Sobti Infratech had indeed submitted a bid for the first phase of the CM Grid scheme, but the firm reportedly failed to clear the technical evaluation stage. It is alleged that documents linked to this unsuccessful bid may later have been repurposed or misrepresented as proof of completed work, though this aspect is still under examination and no final conclusion has yet been drawn.
Possible consequences
At present, departments concerned are carrying out a detailed scrutiny of all relevant records. If the allegations are substantiated, the firm could face cancellation of its bid, blacklisting from future tenders, and possible legal proceedings under applicable rules. The final course of action will depend on the findings of the ongoing inquiry.
The Sitapur tender controversy has once again underscored the critical importance of document verification, transparency, and accountability in public procurement. With large sums of public money involved, even minor lapses in scrutiny can have far-reaching consequences. All eyes are now on the outcome of the investigation, which is expected to determine whether this case results in corrective action or systemic reform in tender evaluation practices.
About the author – Rehan Khan is a law student and legal journalist with a keen interest in cybercrime, digital fraud, and emerging technology laws. He writes on the intersection of law, cybersecurity, and online safety, focusing on developments that impact individuals and institutions in India.
