Key Points

The CAG has criticized Maharashtra's decision to waive ₹71 crore in toll fees for IRB during the Covid lockdown. The audit found the waiver violated the contract, as IRB failed to insure against force majeure events. Despite initial rejection, MPEL later approved the compensation, which CAG termed an undue favor. The state has now ordered IRB to repay the amount within three months.

Key Points: CAG Flags Maharashtra Govt's ₹71 Crore Toll Waiver to IRB During Covid

  • CAG slams Maharashtra govt for bypassing contract clauses in IRB toll waiver
  • Audit cites lack of insurance cover by IRB for force majeure events
  • ₹71 crore waiver granted despite lockdown being a non-political event
  • MSRDC directed to recover disputed amount from IRB within 3 months
3 min read

CAG raps Maha govt over toll waiver on Mumbai-Pune expressway during Covid-19

CAG audit reveals Maharashtra govt's irregular ₹71 crore toll waiver to IRB on Mumbai-Pune Expressway during Covid lockdown.

"Payment of ₹71 crore by MPEL to IRB was undue favour, violating agreement terms – CAG Report"

Mumbai, July 18

The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) on compliance audit has made a scathing observation over the "irregular" revenue waiver by the Maharashtra government of Rs 71.07 crore to the toll operator on the Mumbai-Pune Expressway for a period during the lockdown as a result of Covid-19 pandemic, officials said on Friday.

The auditor report was tabled by Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar in the Assembly on Friday.

The audit report said that Mumbai-Pune Expressway Limited (MPEL) is a government company owned and controlled by Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC) and it entered into a sub-concession agreement on February 28, 2020, from March 1, 2020 to April 30, 2030, with the IRB MP Expressway Private Limited (IRB), for "tolling, operation, maintenance and transfer" of Mumbai-Pune highway with effect from March 1, 2020, for a sub-concession fee of Rs 8,262 crore.

"The upfront amount payable by IRB to the MPEL was Rs 6,500 crore (due on March 1, 2020, with interest 9.5 per cent per annum, if delayed) while the balance Rs 1,762 crore was payable in next three years. The toll collection commenced from March 1, 2020, and the contract is in progress," it added.

The audit report said that Article 25.1 of the agreement prescribed that IRB will effect and maintain suitable insurance cover at its own cost to cover third party claims and 'force majeure' events, including non-political events.

As per Article 27.2, non-political event includes act of god, epidemic, earthquake, flood, landslide, cyclone, strikes/boycotts, any court orders, geological conditions and similar circumstances of nature.

"The Article 27.7.2 of the agreement provides that any losses arising due to occurrence of such non-political events, the parties will bear their respective force majeure cost and neither party will be required to pay to the other party any cost thereof," the report added.

CAG in its report also said that the IRB, however, did not insure its business for force majeure events.

After implementation of government lockdown from March 23, 2020, in response to contain Covid-19, the toll collection was disrupted and this constituted a non-political force majeure event in terms of Article 27.2, the report added.

"IRB requested (March 24, 2020) MPEL to bear the losses of toll revenue and grant a waiver in the sub-concession fee. MPEL rejected (April 9, 2020) the claims citing the relevant clauses pertaining to non-political force majeure events. Thereafter, upon continued requests from IRB to consider their case for suitable compensation, the Board of Directors of MPEL in its meeting ( April 20, 2020) agreed to provide compensation based on computation of revenue loss for 25 days in toll collection. The amount of compensation was worked out to Rs 71.07 crore, as prescribed by the Board, was effected by reduction (June 18, 2020) in first installment of concession fee received," the report said.

"The decision of the MPEL for payment of compensation of Rs 71.07 crore to IRB for a non-political force majeure event was not in compliance with Article 27.2 and 25.1 of the Agreement. As such, IRB should have borne the force majeure cost. Thus, payment of force majeure cost of Rs 71.07 crore by MPEL to IRB was in contravention to provisions of the agreement and undue favour to IRB to the said extent," it added.

Following the dispute, a mediation report dated October 13, 2023, advised IRB to remit the amount of Rs 71.06 crore to MPEL.

"The government said (on December 2023) that recovery of Rs 71.07 crore has been initiated. The government further said (August 2024) that MSRDC has been directed to recover Rs 71.06 crore from the contractor within three months," the report said.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priyanka N
During Covid, common people suffered so much. Why should toll operators get special treatment? The agreement clearly stated they should bear such costs. Government must recover every rupee with interest! 👏 to CAG for exposing this.
S
Sunil U
As someone who frequently uses Mumbai-Pune expressway, I remember those lockdown days. The waiver was unfair - other businesses suffered losses too without government help. The contract terms were clear, why bend them? Good that CAG caught this.
A
Anjali F
While the CAG report is technically correct, we must remember the unprecedented situation during Covid. Maybe the government acted in good faith to keep infrastructure running? Though recovery should definitely happen now that normalcy has returned.
V
Varun X
This is why we need stronger contract enforcement in India. Private companies take calculated risks when bidding for projects. If they don't insure properly, why should public money bail them out? Hope this sets a precedent for future contracts. #AccountabilityMatters
K
Kavitha C
The real issue is why IRB didn't have insurance as per contract. ₹71 crore could have vaccinated lakhs of people! Government must blacklist such irresponsible contractors. Also, officials who approved this waiver should face disciplinary action.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50