To,

The Inquiring Authority,

Northern Coal Fields Limited,
Singrauli.

Sub.:- Statement of defense of Sri RP Singh, S.E.(Excv), Bina.

Ref.:- Memorandum No.- NCL/VIG/08/2241 dtd.13.03.09

Dear Sir,

In the above-mentioned Memorandum, undersigned have been charged for committing

following misconduct: -

1. That I, being a TC member in the capacity of S.E.(Excv) had willfully, negligently and in
a reckless manner recommended for providing proprietary certificate by CE(Excv) for
purchase of Hyd. Pump & Motors.

2. That by way of mentioning proprietary certificate by CE(Excv) I had restricted this file
from sending to D(T)Opn for Competent Approval, as it was beyond DOP of the then
GM, Bina.

In support of above stated so-called allegation against me, Management Representative

produced 4 listed witnesses during course of proceeding. I still deny the articles of charge,
leveled against me and point wise reasons are as under :-

A) Allegation towards issuance of LTE to 2 firms only in violation of Para 2.3.5 of Purchase
Manual is not correct. LTE was issued to 2 firms only as per Para 2.3.4 of Purchase Manual, as
item are critical and sources are limited and proven, already accepted by MW-1 & MW-2 in their
replies during cross-examination. However this is to be noted that in issuance of LTE to 2 firms
only, undersigned had played no role. In above purchase, I acted as TC member from
Excavation department & my role starts only after opening of offers received against said LTE.

NIT was issued to 2 (two) firms only, namely M/s Bosch Rexroth, an OM & M/s Volts
Limited, an OEM, with due approval of the then CGM, Bina. During course of departmental
proceeding management witnesses MW-2 in his replies to Q. No.- 8&9 of cross-examination
had mentioned that right from initiation of proposal till approval for issue of NIT my signature did
not appear at any stage and as such he had clearly mentioned that my role in Issue of Limited
Tender Inquiry to 2 firms only is ruled out. It is all matter of records.

During cross-examination remaining 3 Management Witnesses have also confirmed the

same. All are matter of records.

In light of above, allegation towards issue of LTE to 2 firms only, in violation of Para
2.3.5 of Purchase Manual, is not applicable for me, as I had no role in issue of NIT.

B) During proceeding all management witnesses have mentioned that I, as TC member

willfully, negligently and in a reckless manner recommended for providing proprietary certificate
by CE(Excv) and in turn restricted this file from sending to D(T)Opn for Competent Approval.

It is astonishing to note that hand written note, just below TC recommendation have
been considered as part of TC deliberation that too without bearing countersignature of TC
member. I in my previous reply have already stated that this hand written note, just below typed
TC deliberation was not written till I put my signature on TC recommendation. During cross-
examination MW-2 in his reply to Q.No.-10 had also confirmed that this hand written note do no
appears to be in my handwriting.

Cont. at page – 2.
 [2]

There is correction / overwriting on date mentioned below signature of Sri AK Sharma,

FM, Bina one of the TC member, which had been confirmed by all Management Witnesses.

Management Witness MW-2, in his reply to Q. No.-13 & 14 of cross-examination had

confirmed that any addition/alteration/insertion made in the typed TC recommendation requires
counter signature of all TC member, which is not found in this case. Rest 3 Management’s
Witnesses have also confirmed the same during their cross-examination. At the same time this
proposal after my signature had not been placed before me so that these insertion below TC
recommendation could be revealed by me.

In support of my defense I would like to mention that during the relevant period of time,
there was a practice that draft TCR was prepared by purchase department and draft TCR was
being checked by all TC member. Every TC member used to go through the draft TCR and
make necessary correction, if required. Corrected draft TCR was handed over to MM(P) Bina
who used to get it finally typed TCR, which was then put up before TC member for their
signature. Even if any correction was felt necessary in typed TCR, the same was again returned
back to MM(P) for making necessary correction and typed TCR on Note-sheet was taken out.
Hence question of insertion of hand written note just below TC recommendation was never in
practice at Bina during relevant period of time. In order to substantiated my statement I would
like to produce Sri PK Tiwari, the then Store Keeper, Bina Project, attached with MM(P) and
used to prepare TCR

I would like to mention that being a technical member of committee, insertion of these
hand written note can never be a part of TC recommendation due to following reasons :-

a) Had these items been considered as Proprietary Item of firm then there was no need
to go for LTE. It could have been directly procured from firm, with due approval of
Competent Authority, which was not done. This indicate that procurement of Tendered
Item was under no case comes under Proprietary Item of M/s Bosch Rexroth, OM for
procurement under Proprietary basis as per Purchase Manual. This was the reason that
LTE was issued to 2 firms.

b) Once LTE or Open Tender Notice is issued for procurement of any item, then after
that deviating from offer received & procurement of the same under Proprietary
Certificate by concerned Staff Officer does not arise.

Hence hand written note, just below typed TC recommendation, can never be a part of TC
recommendation. As such allegation that I being a TC member in TC recommendation willfully,
negligently and in a reckless manner recommended “It has become the case of single tender,
so competent approval of HQ is required or proprietary certificate may be obtained from CE(X)”
and gave 2 option to CE(X) which in turn provided scope to CE(X) Bina, in restricting this file
from sending to HQ for Competent Approval, is completely false & far from truth.

Keeping above points I deny charges leveled against me. All are matter of records. With
above lines, I would like to close my defense statement.

( RP Singh)
S.E.(Excv) Bina / CO
Examination – in – Chief of Sri PK Tiwari, the then Store Keeper, Bina Project

Q. No.- 1: Please confirm your place of posting during the period July 07 to Jan.`08.

Ans.: During the period July 07 to Jan.`08, I was posted at Bina Project.

Q. No.- 2: What was the work assigned to you during the above period?

Ans.: During the above period I was attached with MM(P) and as per his instruction I was
preparing TCR for price bid opening as well as Final TCR along with Work-order.

Q. No.- 3: What was the system for preparing of TCR during the above period?

Ans.: During the above period, system was that after opening of Tender documents, another
person, attached with purchase department, was preparing Comparative C/S. File
along with Commercial C/S and tender documents was made available to the
undersigned. I use to prepare a draft TCR, on the basis of TCR of earlier available in
section and draft TCR was used to be placed before MM(P). Draft TCR was checked
by MM(P) as well as finance member and they used to make corrections, required in
TCR. Corrected draft was again handed over to me and in Computer I used to make
correction, as recorded in draft TCR. Once draft TCR was accepted by MM(P) and
other TC member, I used to take out print of TCR on Note-sheet paper and handed
over the file to MM(P). The same procedure was adopted for final TCR also.

Q. No. – 4: Whether correction was made in final TCR taken out on Note-sheet paper?

Ans. : Mostly, whenever TC felt still some correction, I was asked to take out another print out
of TCR with required correction in it.

Q. No.- 5: In your absence who used to carry out your work?

Ans. : If I use to go on leave and some urgent work comes, either 2nd person attached with
purchase department use to do work or some times, another storekeeper from
R/Stores Bina was called for..

At this stage, CO mentioned that he has no more question to ask from his Witness.
Cross-Examination of Defense Witness by MR.

.
Q. No.- 1: Please confirm, whether in any minor correction in TCR were also handed over to you
for correction in final TCR.

Ans.: If any corrected draft or final TCR was handed over to me for correction, I used to take
out corrected TCR on Note-sheet.