The Election Commission has found massive irregularities in one of its projects for constructing its permanent office building and the Election Training Centre at the capital’s Agargaon at a cost of Tk184.84 crore.
In an internal audit conducted by the commission, it was found that several payments from the project’s bank accounts were made against various bills, such as for procuring construction equipment, which had no mention in the project’s cash register.
At the same time, no list of the equipment was also found in any other documents of the project.
The audit report also reveals that several payments were made to the project’s construction firms – Till-TBL Consortium and Kushly Constrcution Limited – and consulting firm Limited and Professional Associate Ltd without registering the payments.
Money was withdrawn from the project fund without sufficient proof especially for conveyance.
The project began in July 2011 to construct an 11-storey building for the EC and a 12-storey Election Training Centre on the commission’s own land.
The irregularities were unearthed after the commission had asked its Senior Accountant Shahed Hasan to conduct an audit of the project after former director Prodash Kanti Das handed over the charge to the new director. Prodash was transferred as the personal secretary of Land Minister Shamsur Rahman Sharif in April this year.
The audit examined payment vouchers against financial records maintained by the project’s accountant Suhas Chandra Das and computer operator Sayeed Ahmad.
According to the audit report, the project’s cash book had no records of procuring equipment and transactions from its bank account although vouchers were shown against payments from the account.
On April 16, the day Prodash Kanti Das handed over charge, Tk2.20 lakh was withdrawn from the project’s bank account without mentioning the purpose of the expenditure. The matter was not registered in the cash book.
The project’s cash register showed no withdrawal of money from the bank account after August 29 last year.
Talking to the Dhaka Tribune, an official of the commission said the EC’s planning and development wing had already sent a letter to the current director of the project, Asfaq Hossain, seeking explanation for such irregularities and declared that no bills for the project’s adviser firm shall be cleared until and unless the matter was solved.
The letter also asked the management of the project to make sure that no further anomalies take place in the project’s financial records.
Acknowledging the findings of the audit report, EC Secretary Sirazul Islam told the Dhaka Tribune: “We have detected several irregularities in the project from the audit report. As the then director of the project has been transferred, we will take legal action against him after scrutinising the report further. If found guilty, we will also inform the Ministry of Public Administration to take punitive measures against him.”
When contacted, former project director Prodash Kanti Das said he knew about the audit report and claimed that he could not prepare the procurement documents because of his sudden transfer.
He also claimed that there was no problem with the project and everything was on schedule.
However, it was found that the construction firms have been able to complete only the foundation work of the two buildings in the past three years although the project is scheduled to be completed by December next year.
The audit report advised suspension of payment to the Limited and Professional Associate Ltd for not submitting monthly and inquiry reports as per its agreement with the commission.
The ERC project paid Tk7,321,875 in three instalments to the firm for monitoring the construction.
According to the project documents, Tk30.83 crore were allocated for two construction firms – Till-TBL Consortium and Kushly Constrcution Limited – for the fiscal year 2013-14. The audit report said Tk97,756,949 was paid to Kushly Construction in four instalments while Tk83,121,807 was paid to TBL Construction.
However, no details or documents were found at the project office on how many bills had been realised by the two construction firms, the audit report said.
The report also added that the construction firms had been submitting bills to the adviser firm, not to the project director, and the adviser firm had been forwarding the bills to the project management which was a clear violation of the conditions of the project’s contract.
