Vijayawada: The AP Medtech Zone (AMTZ) tenders have been scrapped by the department of health. A fresh tender has been called, with an estimated cost of Rs 400 crore.
This comes following controversy over the tender process. The tender advertised earlier was cancelled as the winning bidder had not yet given the escrow account required as per tender conditions.
The escrow account condition incorporated in the tender from the beginning was a wise decision to ensure that the money paid to a construction company is utilised only for the purpose of construction.
The current tender is for Phase I. Tenders for the subsequent phases, each costing between Rs 150 crore and Rs 200 crore, will be advertised as work progresses.
The tender has been divided into parts for speedy implementation of the project as the Centre’s financial support has already been received, according to Mr Jitender Sharma, chief executive officer. The cost of construction of the manufacturing units will be paid by manufacturers.
The clarification given by health minister Dr Kamineni Srinivas in August over the AMTZ issue has still left some doubts in the medical infrastructure sector and officials of the ministry over the plans.
Row over Medtech CEO
has not given any clarity over the appointment of a chief executive officer for AP Medtech Zone, as Mr Jitender Sharma, appointed CEO on contract, is alo adviser to the government.
Mr Sharma was appointed on January 23, 2016, with a salary of '60,000 per month, with a provision for a 10 per cent salary hike every year, according to the GO issued by the principal secretary, health, medical and family welfare.
The government issued another GO, on May 1, 2017, stating that the adviser’s salary had been enhanced to '1 lakh per month with effect from February 1.
These details mentioned in the GOs were communicated to the Chief Secretary by a few bureaucrats, who are feeling constricted at the reported involvement of the CEO, AMTZ.
“While he is already adviser to the government, what prompted the ministry to provide him another post,” a bureaucrat asked on the condition of anonymity.
He asked how the salary of the adviser could be hiked, which was against the spirit of the first government. “All these developments led to suspicion over the functioning of the CEO,” he observed.
