LAHORE, March 27: The Water and Power Development Authority said on Sunday that the consultant had recommended it to pay $20.67 million claims to the Chashma hydel project contractor. Answering queries about payment, which triggered controversy within Wapda, the project’s general-manager (north), Brig Mushtaq Ahmad (retired), said the consultant (who also has judicial powers according to the terms of the contract) whetted the contractor’s claims.
Mr Ahmad was also convener of the Wapda committee, which asked the authority to make the payment to avoid litigation because “it ran the risk of losing the case in case of arbitration.”
He said the contractor had originally submitted claims of $61 million, which were not processed by the consultant. Wapda refused to pay the amount because its consultant set guidelines for any subsequent claims, he said.
Subsequently, the contractors submitted another list of claims amounting to $36 million according to the consultant’s guidelines. The consultant, however, assessed them at $33.157 million after thorough study.
Being a neutral party (between Wapda and the project contractor), the consultation body asked the authority to pay $33 million.
According to the GM, the authority was obliged to pay the amount and there was no way it could have won the case after the recommendations of the consultant. “That is why, the committee which works under him to assess Wapda’s legal position, recommended payments.” It also re-negotiated claims and brought the contractor down to $20.67 million, he said.
The critics, however, insist that Wapda gave extension to the contractors without accepting any liability of additional payment. This basic decision of the employer provided basis for subsequent claims by the contractor, who had accepted the decision and returned to work.
The decision could have been defended in any court and Wapda took the step in haste because of some vested interests, they said.
It is pertinent to mention that Wapda had lately decided to pay $20.67 million claims to the Chashma Power Project civil works contractor and stoked off a controversy within the organization.
Some of the members of the committee, formed by the authority to assess its legal position, refused to sign the final report that recommended the payment.