Why is SIIDCUl fleecing the industrialists in the name of maintenance and operations cost when over half of the money is being transferred to the head officeIJ This question has been raised by the SIIDCUl operations and maintenance board committee members that was constituted two years ago to keep transparency in income and expenditures. However, the SIIDCUl officials say that to maintain the pothole-free roads, much more is spent than what is received from the industrialists.
Notably, following the request of SIIDCUl Manufacturers Association, a board committee was formed in 2014. Subsequently, quarterly meeting is being held to maintain transparency in the system. The maintenance board committee comprises president represented by CDO, secretary represented by regional manager SIIDCUl and three members from industry-Cello Industries, Padma Services and SEWA. The committee was formed under chairmanship of the district magistrate Haridwar.
The industrialists allege that the roads are in a bad shape and the street lights are not being maintained. Only 50 per cent of the lights are working while a sizeable number of women-nearly 27,000- are working in different industrial units of SIIDCUl who leave the factory premises at 8 pm. Also the nalas (rain water drains) are not cleaned regularly, they complain.
Quizzed, the AE of SIIDCUl Sushil Bhatt said, “In the 40 km road stretch, no pothole can be traced and even if a choking problem occurs in a road-side drain during the monsoon it is fixed up in an hour. We are maintaining excellent roads in the whole of the Industrial area.”
It is also alleged by the industrialists that they are made to pay heavy operational and maintenance costs while the actual expenditure is much less. Speaking to The Pioneer, chairman of SIIDCUl Manufacturers’ Association, Harendra Garg said, “Why should we pay Rs6.76 per sqm of covered area while the actual cost is around Rs2 onlyIJ”
“Since April 1 2007, we have been paying the operation and maintenance charges to SIIDCUl but the infrastructural facilities are not at all maintained,” said Arun Saraswat of cosmetic unit Padma Services. Anil Sharma, another industrialist, had echoed similar views regarding maintenance facilities and the cost incurred.
The minutes of the meeting held on April 7 2016 presided over by CDO Sonika and the industry members show that the committee demanded to define the rights and duties of the committee formed by SIIDCUl’s managing director. The committee further asked in a statement –“Only some amount of the total amount submitted for maintenance and operations is being spent for the said purpose while the rest of the amount is being siphoned to the head office without our consent.”
Furthering the issue, Garg said, “As per the income and expenditure sheet of the last financial year, out of Rs 6 crores collected, an estimated amount of Rs 5 crores have been transferred to the head office without our consent. We demand transparency in the system.”
Asked to comment, AE of SIIDCUl Haridwar said, “The maintenance cost is all centralised. In actuality much more is spent in the maintenance of the infrastructure than what is recovered from the industrialists. It is all stated in the lease agreement and the other charges. If someone doesn’t agree to the SIIDCUl policies, he must not apply for the plot.”