National Commission Upholds Order Against Brigade Developers

Prof.S.K.Ananda Thirtha, Working President, Mysore Grahakara Parishat writes

In a judgment given on 10-2-09, the National Consumer Commission upheld the order of the Mysore District Consumer Forum ordering Brigade Developers Pvt. Ltd. to pay damages for substandard construction of an apartment building.

P.M. Bhat who had bought an apartment in the Brigade "Retreat" building constructed on Adi Pampa Road, V.V.Puram, by Brigade Developers had complained that the approved plan for the building showed that the height of the ceiling from the floor as 2.85 m, but the actual height was only 2.65 m. This violated not only the approved plan but also the National Building Code of India 1970 which mandated 2.75 m as the minimum ceiling height. Bhat had complained that the builders had made illegal profit by reducing the height of the floor. The Forum agreed that this was a deficiency in service and ordered Brigade Developers Pvt. Ltd. to pay the complainant Rs. 25,000 to meet the financial loss suffered by him due to this substandard construction. The Forum awarded an additional Rs. 75,000 compensation to the complainant noting that "...the complainant and his family members are forced to reside in such building for their entire life with lesser ventilation. This defect and deficiency can not be removed by any means."

The builder filed an appeal before the Karnataka State Consumer Commission arguing that Bhat had signed a declaration at the time of taking possession of the flat stating that he had conducted a detailed inspection of the flat and was satisfied with the construction and had no claims against the builder. The Commission said that the question whether the signature was obtained by force or not can only be decided in a civil court and set aside the order of the District Forum.

Bhat went in appeal before the National Commission. The National Commission observed that the purchaser of the flat is under duress to sign the declaration because, otherwise, he is not given the flat. So even after signing such a declaration, he has a right to obtain legal redress to any defects in construction, the Commission said.

The National Commission also noted that in the case of another flat in the same building, the ceiling height was as low as 2.31 m and Mysore CIty Corporation had issued the builder a legal notice for this violation. When Brigade Developers Pvt. Ltd issued a press statement saying there were no violations in the building and that MCC had closed the matter, N.Jayaram, the then Commissioner of MCC, issued a counter press release stating that the building had violated the law and that MCC had not closed the matter. The National Commission said that this press statement of MCC weakened the case of the builder, overturned the decision of the State Commission and confirmed the order of the District Forum. It also ordered the builder to pay Rs. 10,000 as costs to Bhat.

The Attendance Records Of Our MPs

Prof.S.K.Ananda Thirtha, Member, Mysore Grahakara Parishat writes

The time to vote for our Lok Sabha members is almost upon us. This may be an opportune time to review the performance of representatives from South Karnataka in the last Lok Sabha. There is an organization in Delhi called Parliamentary Research Service which tabulates the performance of all the MPs in the Lok Sabha and the information is available here . The results for C.H. Vijayashankar, M. Shivanna and M.H. Ambareesh in the last Lok Sabha were as follows.

MP's name   Constituency       No. of debates participated  No.of Attendance  questions asked


C.H. Vijayashankar    Mysore   5    34     40%

M. Shivanna               C'nagar  108  414   70%

M.H. Ambareesh        Mandya  0     0       27%

Average of all
Lok Sabha members               30    169     69%

Average of all LS members
from Karnataka                       20    156     56%

Carelessness of MCC Posing Danger To Traffic

B.Vaikunth Shenoy, Member, Mysore Grahakara Parishat

Some time ago, MCC dug up the road in front of Brahmakumari building in Yadavagiri to repair a water line. The pit (Photo, Left) was the intersection of three roads and so posed a serious threat to traffic, especially at night. The pit remained unfilled for more than two weeks and after repeated complaints from the residents, it was filled up (Photo, Right). But the filling has sunk in, again posing danger to traffic. Why can MCC not do a simple job right?

JUSCO Agreement - Everything You Wanted To Know

P.M.Bhat, Member, Mysore Grahakara Parishat writes

To improve the water supply infrastructure of Mysore, MCC has signed an agreement with Jamshedpur Utilities and Services Company (JUSCO). Many people and organizations are opposing this agreement claiming that it is privatization of water supply, and if not directly privatization, the first step in privatization. The contract which is about 700 pages long is available at MCC's website (click here ) . People can go through it and make up their own mind. We went through the contract and other sources to find answers to some frequently asked questions about the JUSCO contract.

Where does the money for the contract come from?

In 2005, the central government launched the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) to upgrade the infrastructure of various cities in India. Under this programme, cities can submit infrastructure improvement projects to the central government. For cities such as Mysore, if the project is approved, the central government meets 80% of the cost and the state government meets another 10%. Therefore, by spending only 10% of the cost, cities can carry out projects which would normally be beyond their financial reach. The contract that MCC has signed with JUSCO to improve the water supply infrastructure in Mysore is one such JNNURM Project.

How did JUSCO get the contract?

MCC prepared a Rs. 230 crore project to improve the water supply infrastructure in Mysore and submitted it to the central government. The central government trimmed it to Rs. 195 crores before approving it. Two tenders were floated for the works. The first one was to build major overhead tanks all over Mysore and supply them with water from the water treatment plants through large underground pipes. Nagarjuna Construction Company won this tender for Rs. 77 crores. The second tender was for creating an Integrated Management Information System for the water supply, doing all the work required to make the present intermittent non-pressurized water supply system into a continuous pressurized 24x7 water supply system and maintaining the system for 6 years. 12 companies participated in the tender process: Subhash Projects & Marketing, JUSCO, JVRCL Infrastructure & Projects, Tata Consultancy Services, Veolia Water of France, Jain Irrigation Systems, Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services, Jindal Water Infrastructure, Vishwa Infrastructure & Services, Larsen & Toubro, Nagarjuna Construction Company and Ranhill Water Services of Malaysia. JUSCO won the tender with the lowest bid of Rs. 162 crores. Ranhill Water Services made the second lowest bid of Rs. 256 crores and Larsen & Toubro had the third lowest bid at Rs. 305 crores.

It was curious that two companies of the Tata group, TCS and JUSCO competed with each other in the bidding. It was also curious that Veolia and JUSCO which are running a joint operation in India since 2004 bid separately. The variation in the bid amounts was another surprising factor. JUSCO's bid was only Rs. 162 crores, while Jain Irrigations Systems' bid was Rs. 882 crores! JUSCO quoted Rs. 40 crores for management while Larsen & Toubro quoted only Rs. 16 crores (L&T lost out because it quoted an excessive amount on materials).

What are JUSCO's credentials?

According to the JUSCO website (click here), JUSCO has been managing the water supply of Jamshedpur for the last 102 years. In addition to Jamshedpur and Mysore, it has water supply operations in Bhopal, Gwalior, Calcutta, Haldia, Muzaffurpur and Chennai.

According to the website of the Japan Institute of Plant Maintenance, (click here) a public corporation under Japan's Ministry of Economics, Trade & Industry, JIPM gave out Total Productive Maintenance Excellence awards in 2008 to fifty companies all over the world and JUSCO was one of the awardees.

According to the website globalwaterawards.com, JUSCO was one of just 4 nominees for the 2008 Water Company of the Year global award.

What are some of the features of the JUSCO contract?

The contract was signed on 28-11-08. The period of the contract is 6 years. There are conditions which specify how much work should be done in how much time and what performance targets should be achieved in what time. If the work is done ahead of time and the targets met ahead of time, JUSCO gets a bonus. If there is a delay, JUSCO pays a penalty.

Was the contract kept a secret from the citizens of Mysore?

One of the conditions for receiving JNNURM funds is that citizens should participate in the preparation of the project. Such participation has been absent from the JNNURM projects of Mysore city. The officials show dates on which consultation meetings with the public were held, but we have seen no announcements of these meetings. So, if they were held at all, only friends of the officials must have participated in them. Such meeting can not be termed public meetings.

Was it necessary to give this work to JUSCO?

Mysore city water supply is suffering from many serious problems. A significant portion of customers do not have meters. Most of the meters are not working properly. There is plenty of leakage all over the city. As a result of these factors, only a small fraction of the water pumped into the city gets billed. Many customers do not pay their water bills. So MCC is collecting only a fraction of the amount due to it. Due to lack of revenue, maintenance of the system is not possible. In many localities, water is supplied once in few days. When it is supplied, the pressure is low. Quality of water supplied is also poor. So poor that one can not help wondering why we are not having epidemics every day! No one knows where all the underground pipes and valves are. As a result, in many cases, one can not even localize the problem.

These problems are getting worse with time. After spending Rs. 130 crores of ADB loan to provide 24x7 water supply, we are pumping twice the water into Mysore, but the water problem is increasing. Neither MCC nor the Water Board seem to have the technical expertise required to run the water supply system efficiently. MCC does not have the determination to collect its dues in the face of political pressure. Without outside intervention, the situation will soon become irreparable. It is in need of emergency treatment. The only way out seems to seek the help of competent and experienced professionals. But such help does not come cheap.

Does the contract represent privatization? Will JUSCO make unlimited profits from the contract?

For the designated work done by JUSCO during the 6-year duration of the contract, it will get a fixed compensation of Rs.162 crores. Other than the bonuses it will get for reaching performance targets earlier, it will not get any other money. Privatization normally means the opportunity to make as much profit as the company can. Such an opportunity seems to be absent in the contract.

Will the water tax rise steeply after the contract?

According to the contract, JUSCO has no role in fixing the water rates. It is the jurisdiction of MCC. The water tax will increase only if MCC decides to increase it.

But JUSCO has been given the job of making sure that every customer location is fitted with a correctly working meter. If you were paying less water tax because of a defective meter or some other reason, then your tax will increase.

Will public taps be closed after the contract?

This decision belongs to MCC.

Will the contract achieve its goals?

The central government does not seem to have a lot of faith in the ability of local governments to implement the projects themselves. So it is encouraging participation of private companies in the JNNURM projects. But it seems to have forgotten the fact that the job of inspecting and approving the work done and releasing the money rests with the local bodies. That is where the problem seems to lie. MCC gives hundreds of jobs to private companies every year. Works such as road repair have been done by private companies for a long time now. Of late, even works such as garbage collection and management of street lights have been outsourced to private companies. It is clear that none of these works is being done right, which means that MCC officials are approving substandard work and paying the contractors. The goal of the JUSCO contract will not be achieved if JUSCO also does substandard work and MCC officials give it the stamp of approval. There may be organized resistance to meter installation and disconnection of unauthorized connectionss and it is not clear if JUSCO can tackle it.

If You Do Not Want To Vote, Register Your Refusal to Vote!

Maj.Gen. (Rtd.) S.G. Vombatkere, President, Mysore Grahakara Parishat writes

All voters know what they want in the elections. But the question is which candidate to vote for. The party that you like to vote for may not field a worthy candidate, or the candidate you want to vote for may belong to an unworthy party.

Just because there is no right candidate, do not refrain from going to the polling booth, because your vote may be misused by unscrupulous elements to make a truly bad candidate win. If you do not want to vote for any candidate, tell the presiding officer of the polling booth after your name has been checked in the voters register, that you do not want to vote for anyone. According to Section 49-O of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, the officer will make a note that you do not wish to vote for any candidate and ask you to sign it. If enough people use their right not to vote, it will send a strong message to the political parties that they are not nominating the right candidates.

Kudos to MCC Commissioner and Revenue Officer

P.M. Bhat, Member, Mysore Grahakara Parishat writes

The Self Assessment Scheme of Property Tax was implemented all over Karnataka from April 1, 2005. As the name itself makes it clear, each property owner assesses the property tax due on his/her property and pays it to the City Corporation. The City Corporation scrutinizes these returns and if there is underpayment, issues a demand notice to the owner for the arrears.

But this is not the way it worked in actual practice till now. Unless the tax returns are prepared by the tax preparers who sit in the zonal offices, it was very likely that the Corporation officials would not accept the tax returns. "Self Assessment" had lost all meaning.

But now the Commissioner of MCC, Mr. K.S. Raykar and the Revenue Officer Ms. D. Bharati have restored the meaning of SAS. A notice (No. HAPR 1/08-09 dated 09-04-09) has been issued to all assistant commissioners and assistant revenue officers of Mysore City Corporation instructing them to accept the self assessed property tax paid by the property owners. A self-assessed property tax can not be rejected. If the self assessment is defective, MCC officers have been asked to issue an endorsement to the property owner.

MCC Commissioner and Revenue Officer are to be congratulated for reviving the true spirit of the SAS. Property owners can now pay their taxes without much hassle. If property tax is paid before the end of June, the owners can avoid the monthly late payment penalty of 2%. If the tax is paid in April itself, they can avail of a rebate of 5%.

In this connection, a delegation from MGP met with the Commissioner and the Revenue Officer and urged them to implement all the provisions of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act relating to property tax. The Commissioner said that there are some legal hurdles. Clarifications have been sought from the state government. They will be placed before the City Council (which can not meet till the Election Code is lifted) and a decision taken by the City Council.

Where Is The Punishment for Garbage Throwers?

B.Vaikunth Shenoy, member, Mysore Grahakara Parishat writes

Mysore City Corporation has published advertisements in papers threatening to fine anyone who throws garbage on the streets. The three-wheelers which come to collect garbage from each household every morning also carry a warning that people who throw garbage on the streets will be fined. But these threats remain only on paper and we do not know of anyone who has actually been fined for littering the streets. Some neighbours of Ravi Nursing Home (1st Main and 3rd Cross, Yadavagiri) are dumping huge amounts of garbage on the streets (See Photo) and despite complaints to MCC, no action has been taken and garbage continues to fall, spoiling the entire surroundings. Will MCC wake up and punish the guilty?

STOP INSTALLING SODIUM VAPOUR LIGHTS

D.V. Dayanand Sagar, Member, Mysore Grahakara Parishat writes

Mysore City Corporation is on a spree replacing tube lights on streets with sodium vapour lamps, not just on street corners, but also away from street corners (The photo in the Attachment shows two sodium lamps within 50 feet of each other on a short quiet street in Yadavagiri). It has become a status symbol to have a sodium vapour lamp in front of one's house and so anyone with any influence at all moves heaven and earth to get a sodium vapour lamp next to his house.

According to Down To Earth magazine dated 1-3-2009, experts are of the view that sodium vapour lamps may be more suited for highways, but for residential roads, T5 and T8 fluorescent lamps are better for efficiency and economy. Following this advice, Indore Municipal Corporation recently changed about half the city's street lights from sodium vapour to fluorescent lights and as a consequence is saving Rs. 1 crore in electricity charges.

Has MCC undertaken any study on the relative merits of sodium vapour lamps and fluorescent lamps? If not, why is it changing fluorescent lamps with sodium lamps incurring enormous installation costs and higher operating costs? Does it not know that other cities are going the opposite way and saving money?