The extra payment of ₹98.26 lakh made by Gulbarga University to Wild Bird Securities & Maintenance Services, the manpower agency that supplied more than 200 workers to various departments in the university in 2013-14 and 2014-15, has raised questions. Many academics alleged that the university authorities had connived with the agency to help the latter clear its dues to the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation.
As per sources, the agency had failed to remit the statutory dues of ₹98,26,129 to the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation. When the university as principal employer, too did not remit the dues as per law, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Kalaburagi, on December 7, 2016, wrote a letter to the Branch Manager of State Bank of Hyderabad, Gulbarga University branch, where the university has an account, ordering him to pay the dues from the university account (a copy of this letter is with The Hindu ).
With this background, the Syndicate in its meeting on February 2, 2017, concluded that the wage rates quoted by the agency and finalised in the contract were less than the wages fixed by Minimum Wages Act, 1948. It then resolved to pay the difference amount to the agency as the latter had agreed to pay the PF dues. Accordingly, the university paid ₹98.26 lakh though there was no financial provision in the university budget of 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17.
One of the tender terms and conditions clearly says that no request from the agency for increasing the rates after they are finalised in the agreement would be entertained. In this case, it is clearly violated in the name of paying the difference amount to the agency on latter’s request.
Paying the difference amount after three years shows that the agency and the university were violating the Minimum Wages Act by paying the workers lesser than what was fixed by the government as minimum wages during 2013-14 and 2014-15. It was only after Regional PF Commissioner’s letter in December 2016 to the bank manager for recovering the dues from university bank account that the agency and the university realised. Soon, the agency requested the university to pay the difference amount and the same was met by the latter.
Another condition of the financial bid specifically compels the agency to submit the details of remittance of ESI, PF and all applicable service taxes of each employee while claiming the bill every month. The university continued to pay the agency’s bills though the latter had not submitted any such details.
“The Syndicate took a wrong decision. The government should not allow university to use public money for safeguarding the faulty agency. It should ensure that the money paid will be recovered from the agency and a criminal case is booked against the agency,” Dr. Razak Ustaad, a member of the Academic Council of the university, told The Hindu. He added that awarding the contract to the agency was a wrong move as the government had asked the university to blacklist the agency as it was known for not remitting PF. “Moreover, the agency had quoted third lowest. Yet, Syndicate decided to gave the contract to it though there were two more bidders who quoted less than what it did. It was clear violation of KTPP Act,” he said.
Another Academic Council member Venkatesh Patel, condemned the “financial criminality” committed by the Syndicate and urged the Governor to order probe.
Akkamahadevi Raviraj Patil, member, Syndicate, accepted that the decision to pay the additional amount was taken just to avoid the university bank account from being frozen. “The registrar has assured that the amount already paid would be recovered,” she said. Repeated calls made to reach S.R. Niranjana, V-C, and Dayanand Asgar, Registrar, went unanswered.
