30-07-2025
Need to revive field sampling system, increase vigil for quality devpt works
Arun Kumar Sinha
Junior doctors and highly experienced doctors perform the same duties: examining patients and prescribing appropriate treatment. In the case of technocrats (govt engineers), junior officers oversee fieldwork, whereas senior officers often get disconnected from ground realities.
Burdened with administrative responsibilities or other factors, senior engineers gradually lose touch with on-site learning and practical exposure.
Several instances have been observed where senior technocrats, seemingly frustrated, instruct junior staff to overlook critical issues for various reasons. In early 2020, a 'think tank committee' was established at the Public Works Department headquarters under the leadership of the then minister.
A presentation was made on measures to involve senior officers more actively in fieldwork to enhance quality and service delivery.
An earlier case was revisited in which there was a dispute with a contractor regarding the quantity of material supplied for a road construction project. When the matter of overpayment was raised, a senior officer responded that he was not concerned about right or wrong, he only appreciated the one who could manage the "business" in an amicable manner.
It was suggested at the time to revive the old 'sampling' system, which was once widely followed. Under this system, all technocrats — from junior engineer to chief engineer — would spend time at construction sites during the early and middle phases of a project to personally inspect samples of ongoing work.
While the suggestion was acknowledged as relevant and actionable, no official instructions or office orders have been issued thus far.
Established in 1867, the age-old framework of UPPWD has operated effectively for decades. However, like many other govt departments, the quality and productivity within UPPWD have seen a decline over time. It is strongly recommended that the sampling practice be made mandatory for all officials involved in fieldwork to ensure accountability and maintain quality standards.
Furthermore, in 2012, the then Planning Commission (now NITI Aayog) introduced a new contracting model — EPC (Engineering, Procurement, and Construction) — to accelerate the pace of projects.
While the EPC model has facilitated faster completion of projects undertaken by both NHAL and PWD, it has inherent flaws. Under this model, the entire design is developed by the agency hired by the contractor. These designs and drawings are then reviewed first by a proof consultant and subsequently by an independent consulting firm, known as the authority engineer.
This approach carries the risk that the contractor may propose designs that prioritize cost-efficiency, sometimes at the expense of safety or quality.
During the supervision of the Agra- Lucknow Expressway construction project, it was found that many proof consultants rarely highlighted critical flaws in the designs to govt authorities. In some cases, consultants appeared to endorse designs without thorough review. A similar pattern was noted with some of the authority engineers appointed for oversight.
To reduce costs, many such consulting firms recruit individuals who accept lower compensation, thereby compromising the expertise required for such crucial tasks.
Increased vigilance over proof consultants and authority engineers engaged in EPC projects is essential. In recent structural failures, investigation officers must examine whether these independent consultants overlooked design deficiencies that could have contributed to the failure.
(The writer is a retired chief engineer at the UP public works department. Views are personal.)
