|  | 
      
        | 
            
            
            
            
            
                       |   
          
          
          
          Patna,(BiharTimes): Former Bihar excise minister Jamshed Ashraf and the then   excise secretary Amir Subhani were instrumental in “benefiting” liquor companies   of Rs 181.15 crore by awarding them country liquor contract during 2009-2012 at   “increased” rates, according to the yet-to-be-published report of the Bihar   Principal Accountant General (PAG).
 
 |  Jamshed Ashraf was sacked by Nitish Kumar on Feb 18, 2010 after he spoke about   “massive irregularities” in his department. Earlier on Jan 14, 2010 he even   handed over a letter to Nitish to draw his attention towards what he said Rs 500   crore scam.
 Home Secretary Subhani was quoted in the Indian Express as   saying: “I have seen the queries raised by PAG and answered it point-wise   through the excise department. If PAG is still not satisfied with the reply,   there is the Public Accounts Committee to look into it. I am ready to face its   queries.”
 
 The report, which is due to be made public   in February, says: “Due to vitiated, in-transparent, discriminatory and opaque   tendering process followed by a group of handpicked officials of the department,   in a departure from the established process followed in the past and suo motu   unilateral increase in the price of supply of the country liquor on specious   assumptions... the department has not only violated the sanctity of the   tendering process but also provided benefit of Rs 181.15 crore to the wholesale   supplier....”
 
 The PAG report says the excise department had no business   to increase rates of country liquor to Rs 2.80 per 200 ml sachet when the lowest   tendered rate was Rs 2.36. It says this was 10 per cent above existing rate and   15 per cent over the rate quoted by the lowest bidder, whose application was   rejected.
 
 “The four-member screening committee (headed by   Subhani) went beyond their mandate of evaluating the bids and administratively   determined the price on presumptuous and imaginary grounds, provided by a   coterie of suppliers to provide undue benefits to the bidders,” the report   says.
 
 Subhani said the excise department had to raise   price as all tenderers were unhappy with the prevalent price. “Though I agree   that present rate for 200 ml sachet is Rs 2.14 but then, it was Rs 2.54 in 2006.   As per giving maximum supply to one firm, it is because of its capacity,” he   said.
 
 The department, after having added VAT and margin money, fixed   price for 200 ml sachet at Rs 12.25 per 200 ml sachet while it should have been   actually Rs 11.42. It sold 13,57,86,364 sachets of 400 ml (at price of Rs 23.66)   and 31,95,10,973 sachets of 200 ml during 2009-2012.
 
 It had invited   tender for grant of manufacturing and supply on wholesale spiced country liquor   to Bihar State Beverage Corporation Limited from August 1, 2009 to March 31,   2012.
 
 Though the previous tender period   expired on March 31, 2008, the department took several months for fresh   tendering and in the process, previous licensees got undue extension.
 
 PAG also objected to the excise department starting tender process in   February 2009, knowing well that elections were due in May and code of conduct   would be in put in place.
 
 The report says two   lowest tenders, M/s Lords Distillery Ltd and M/s Narang Distillery Ltd, were   rejected on grounds of “non-submission of certificate from registrar of   company”.
 
 PAG says such certificate was outdated requirement. It says   two applications were accepted in absence of similar certificates. The rejection   deprived excise department of competitive rates.
 
 Bihar Liquor (Price Fixation and Control) Rules 1994, says Board   of Revenue will fix the rate of spirit for manufacture of country liquor.   But the excise department did not seek its approval and the tender was   finalised by a screening committee under chairmanship of excise secretary,   PAG says. The government told PAG it had sought the board’s permission in   March 2009, which was not acceptable to PAG.
 
    
	
	
       |