596 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
construction of certain aerodromes were sanctioned by the Chief Engineer, Central Public Works Department, originally at very high rates against which the Provincial Public Works Department was compelled to lodge protests ?
(b) Is it a fact that as a result of such protests a committee was appointed to examine these rates, and the committee reduced the rates to about one third of what were agreed upon by the Chief Engineer ?
(c) Is it a fact that the contractors also agreed lo reduce the rates correspondingly proving thereby that the rates originally awarded were abnormally high ?
(d) If the answer to (c) above be in the affirmative, what action do Government propose to take against the Chief Engineer who was responsible for sanctioning the original rates ?
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : (a) Rates for the construction of the aerodromes in question were accepted by Chief Engineer on proposals put forward by the Executive Engineer through the Superintending Engineer. The rales were high but reliable contractors were not obtainable for work of the dimensions required at lower rales at the lime the work was started. A report was received through the Divisional Commissioner complaining that these rates were unduly high.
(b) and (c) Almost a month before the receipt of any protests from the local officers the Chief Engineer had instructed the Superintending Engineer to make an enquiry and subsequently deputed his Personal Assistant and Financial Adviser to make a further enquiry. By that time conditions had become easier and it was possible to enforce reductions in the rates previously accepted. As a result some rates were considerably reduced, but no rate was reduced to one-third of the previous rates. The reductions accepted by the contractors were nil in respect of certain works, 15 per cent in respect of main runway, 50 per cent in respect of ordinary buildings, and between 30 per cent and
60 per cent in the case of special buildings. The contractor has however, refused to accept the reduced rates proposed in the case of domestic buildings which have therefore been taken away from him and given to another contractor at reduced rates.
(d) There is no case for taking any action against the Chief Engineer.