LESS THAN three months after the CBI filed an FIR naming NBCC CMD A K Mittal among five accused in a case involving the Rs 2,100 crore Pragati Maidan Redevelopment Project, the vigilance department of the state-owned real estate company informed its Board at a meeting on March 8 that the CBI chargesheet failed to establish any charges against Mittal. It said that during investigations, the allegations against Mittal “were not found corroborated”.
Four days later, on March 12, Mittal was given additional charge of Director (Finance) of the company, alongside the post of CMD that he continued to hold even after the CBI FIR and subsequent chargesheet.
The vigilance department's stand raises questions as Para 2(d) of the Department of Personnel and Training's (DoPT) circular, dated December 14, 2007, clearly stipulates that clearance should not be given in a case where an FIR has been filed, other than on a private complaint. The CBI FIR of December 22, 2017, in the ITPO's Pragati Maidan case, was filed after a detailed preliminary enquiry initiated suo motu, and not on a private compliant.
Moreover, other complaints regarding NBCC's execution of ESIC Medical College and Hospitals projects…