11

MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT & HIGHWAYS

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

INCLUDING IMPLEMENTATION OF GOLDEN
QUADRILATERAL

COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES
(2010-2011)
ELEVENTH REPORT

FIFTEENTH LOK SABHA

LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT

NEW DELHI

ELEVENTH REPORT

COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES
(2010-2011)
(FIFTEENTH LOK SABHA)

MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS

(NATIONAL HIGHWAYS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT INCLUDING

IMPLEMENTATION OF GOLDEN QUADRILATERAL)
_______
Presented to Honble Speaker on 27.04.2011
Presented to Lok Sabha on ..2011

LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT

NEW DELHI
April, 2010/ Vaisakha, 1933(S)
________________________________________________________

CONTENTS
Page No.
COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES (2010-11)
COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES (2009-10)
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTORY

CHAPTER II

ORGANISATIONAL SET UP AND FUNCTIONS

CHAPTER III

FINANCIAL ASPECTS IN DEVELOPMENT OF

PROJECTS

CHAPTER IV

(i)

Budgetary allocation

(ii)

Resource mobilization

(iii)

Public-Private Partnership

13
18

ISSUES IN IMPLEMENTATION OF NATIONAL

HIGHWAYS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
(i)

National Highways Development Project

35

(NHDP)
(ii)

Golden Quadrilateral (GQ)

(iii)

Toll Policy

(iv)

Land Acquisition Policy

(v)

Delayed projects

(vi)

Non-performing contractors

(vii)

Maintenance

41
45
52
66
76
80
88

(viii) Road safety

93

(ix)

Sub-contractoring of projects

(x)

Environmental clearance

(xi)

Port-connectivity projects

(xii)

Balanced regional development

(a)Highways
region

projects

97
101

in

North-Eastern

103

(b) Improvement of road connectivity in the

108

Left Wing Extremism (LWE) affected

areas

OBSERVATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS

110

ANNEXURES
(i)

Allocation and expenditure under important

153

schemes of the Ministry of Road Transport &

Highways during the year 2007-08
(ii)

Allocation and expenditure under important

155

schemes of the Ministry of Road Transport &

Highways during the year 2008-09
(iii) Allocation and expenditure under important

157

schemes of the Ministry of Road Transport &

Highways during the year 2009-10
(iv) Details of awarded NHDP Projects

159

(Under implementation)
(v)

Details of awarded NorthSouth EastWest

184

Corridor Projects (Under implementation

and Completed)
(vi) Details of awarded Golden Quadrilateral

192

Projects (Under implementation)

(vii) Details of awarded Golden Quadrilateral

194

Projects (Completed)
(viii) List of Terminated Contracts

197

(ix) NHAI Policy Circular 40/2004, Technical

199

dated 10.08.04 regarding Non-Performing

Contractors
(x)

Status of Port Connectivity Projects

200

(xi) Status of projects of East-West corridors

203

under NHDP Phase II in Assam

APPENDICES
(i)

Minutes of the Sitting of the Committee held

206

on 22.09.2009
(ii)

Minutes of the Sitting of the Committee held

208

on 30.03.2010
(iii) Minutes of the Sitting of the Committee held

210

on 07.04.2010
(iv) Minutes of the Sitting of the Committee held

212

on 24.09.2010
(v)

Minutes of the Sitting of the Committee held

214

on 10.03.2011
(vi) Minutes of the Sitting of the Committee held
on 26.04.2011

216

COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES (2010-11)

Shri Francisco Sardinha Chairman
Members
2.

Smt. Harsimrat Kaur Badal

3.

Shri Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury

4.

Shri Bhakta Charan Das

5.

Shri Milind Deora

6.

Shri T.K.S. Elangovan

7.

Dr. Sanjay Jaiswal

8.

Shri Ramesh Jigajinagi

9.

Shri P. Karunakaran

10.

Shri Chandrakant Khaire

11.

Shri M. Krishnaswamy

12.

Shri Vikrambhai Arjanbhai Madam

13.

Dr. Sanjeev Ganesh Naik

14.

Smt. Ranee Narah

15.

Shri Prabodh Panda

16.

Shri Ravindra Kumar Pandey

17.

Shri Kabindra Purkayastha

18.

Shri Jagdish Singh Rana

19.

Shri K. Jaya Surya Prakash Reddy

20.

Shri M. Sreenivasulu Reddy

21.

Smt. Yashodhara Raje Scindia

22.

Shri S. Semmalai

23.

Shri Arjun Charan Sethi

24.

Shri Madan Lal Sharma

25.

Shri Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh

26.

Dr. Raghuvansh Prasad Singh

27.

Shri Sushil Kumar Singh

28.

Shri Lalji Tandon

29.

Shri Manish Tewari

30.

Shri K.C. Venugopal *

* ceased to be Member of Committee w.e.f. 19.01.2011.

(iii)

SECRETARIAT
1.

Shri P. K. Grover

Joint Secretary

2.

Smt. Anita B. Panda

Additional Director

3.

Smt. Juby Amar

Deputy Secretary

4.

Shri Amit Ankit

Executive Assistant

(iv)

COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES (2009-10)

Shri Francisco Sardinha Chairman
Members
2.

Smt. Harsimrat Kaur Badal

3.

Shri Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury

4.

Shri Bhakta Charan Das

5.

Shri Milind Deora

6.

Shri T.K.S. Elangovan

7.

Dr. Sanjay Jaiswal

8.

Shri Ramesh Jigajinagi

9.

Shri P. Karunakaran

10.

Shri Chandrakant Khaire

11.

Shri M. Krishnaswamy

12.

Shri Vikrambhai Arjanbhai Madam

13.

Shri Mohinder Singh Kaypee

14.

Smt. Ranee Narah

15.

Shri Prabodh Panda

16.

Shri Ravindra Kumar Pandey

17.

Shri Kabindra Purkayastha

18.

Shri Jagdish Singh Rana

19.

Shri K. Jaya Surya Prakash Reddy

20.

Shri M. Sreenivasulu Reddy

21.

Shri C. Rajendran

22.

Shri S. Semmalai

23.

Shri Sanjay Singh Chauhan

24.

Shri Madan Lal Sharma

25.

Shri Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh

26.

Dr. Raghuvansh Prasad Singh

27.

Shri Sushil Kumar Singh

28.

Shri Lalji Tandon

29.

Shri Manish Tewari

30.

Shri K.C. Venugopal

(v)

INTRODUCTION

I, the Chairman of Committee on Estimates (2010-2011) having been authorized

by the Committee to submit the Report on their behalf, present this Eleventh Report
(Fifteenth Lok Sabha) on National Highways Development Project including
implementation of Golden Quadrilateral pertaining to Ministry of Road Transport &
Highways.

2.

The subject was selected for detailed examination by the Committee on

Estimates (2009-2010), taking into account the urgent need to develop a functional,
efficient and well knit network of National Highways, not only to meet infrastructural
requirements but also to provide a boost to the economic development. The subject
National

Highways

Development

Project

including

implementation

of

Golden

Quadrilateral was carried forward for examination & report during the year 2010-2011.

3.

The Committee held five sittings on the subject. The representatives of the

Ministry of Road Transport & Highways briefed the Committee on 22.09.2009 on the
subject. The Committee took their oral evidence on 30.03.2010, 7.04.2010, 24.09.2010
and again on 10.03.2011.

4.

The Report was considered & adopted by the Committee at the sitting held on

26.04.2011.

5.

The Committee would like to express their deep appreciation of the valuable

work done by the Committee on Estimates (2009-2010) in connection with the

examination of the subject.

6.

The Committee wish to express their thanks to the representatives of the Ministry

of Road Transport & Highways and National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), who
appeared before them and placed their considered views on the subject. The
Committee also wish to thank them for furnishing the information required in connection
with examination of the subject during the briefing and oral evidences.

7.

The Committee would also like to place on record their deep sense of

appreciation for the invaluable assistance rendered to them by the officials of the Lok
Sabha Secretariat attached to the Committee.

8.

For

facility

of

reference

and

convenience,

the

observations

and

recommendations of the Committee have been printed in bold letters at the end of the
Report.

NEW DELHI;
26 April, 2011
Vaisakha 6,1933(S)

FRANCISCO SARDINHA,
CHAIRMAN,
COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTORY

The state of economy of a country is aptly manifested by the condition of its

transport system, which plays a pivotal role in the countrys sustained & inclusive
growth. In this transport system, Roads in general and National Highways in particular
are the most potent instrument of reducing economic isolation, bringing social cohesion
and strengthening political integration. Moreover, in a diverse and vast country like
India, National Highways also act as the backbone for cultural exchange and national
unity & integrity.

1.2

India has one of the largest road networks of 3.62 million kms, consisting of

National Highways, Expressways, State Highways, major District Roads, other District
Roads and village Roads. These road networks cater to 60 percent of the freight traffic
and 87.4 percent of passenger traffic.

Although National Highways constitute only

about 2 percent of the road network, it carries 40 percent of total road traffic. National
Highways have witnessed large expansion in recent years, still, to cater to the
unprecedented growth of road traffic, to provide for the future traffic needs and to
improve accessibility to the hinterland in order to bring them into economic mainstream,
it is imperative that development of wellknit network of National Highways are accorded
highest priority.

1.3

In order to take up the improvement and development of National Highways,

National Highways Development Project (NHDP) the largest highways project ever
undertaken by the country, has been initiated in a phased manner.

The National

Highways Authority of India (NHAI) an autonomous body under the Ministry of Road
Transport and Highways has been entrusted with the implementation of this project.
The NHDP programme began in the late 90s with the Phase I & Phase II, which
envisaged 4/6 lanning of about 14,000 Km of National Highways, at an estimated cost
of about `65,000 Cr. at 2004 prices. These two phases comprise ambitious projects of
Golden Quadrilateral (GQ) that consists of 5,846 Km and connects four metro cities
viz. Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata and NorthSouth & EastWest corridors
(NSEW) which consists of 7,142 Km and connects Srinagar in North to KanyaKumari in
the South including a spur from Salem to Kochi and Silchar in the East to Porbandar in
1

the West. The NHDP also includes Port Connectivity Project comprising a length of
380 Km for improvement of roads connecting 12 major ports in the country. NHDP
programme, at present is being implemented in 7 phases viz. Phase I, II, III, IV, V, VI &
VII throughout the country.

1.4

It is, however, being observed for the last few years that certain critical issues

have plagued the NHDP and created impediments in establishing the envisaged
transport infrastructure. The Economic Survey (2010-11), presented in the Parliament
recently, has categorically stated that achievement has been lower than the target in
NHDP during 2007-2008 to 2009-10. In fact, a negative growth of -32.2% for 2010-11
(April - November) has been observed for NHAI projects. Delay in completion of
projects is foremost among the problems confronting National Highways Development
Project (NHDP). Absence of a Comprehensive Toll Policy, inordinate delays in land
acquisitions

and

Environmental

Clearances,

non-performing

contractors

and

Maintenance of existing Highways are other critical issues which need immediate
attention. Alongwith these, issues such as balanced regional development of National
Highways and Road Safety measures (engineering and technical aspect of Road
Safety) also need to be addressed, if a functional and efficient network of National
Highways is to be created. All this necessitates a concerted, coordinated and coherent
effort made through all channels possible.

1.5

In this backdrop, the Committee took up the subject for detailed examination and

report.

CHAPTER II
ORGANIZATIONAL SET UP AND FUNCTIONS

2.1

The Ministry of Road Transport & Highways, an apex organisation under the

Central Government, is entrusted with the task of formulating and administering, in

consultation with other Central Ministries/Departments, State Governments/UT
Administrations, organisations and individuals, policies for Road Transport, National
Highways and Transport Research with a view to increasing the mobility and efficiency
of the road transport system in the country.
2.2

In the background material submitted by the Ministry, the Committee were

informed that the Ministry has three wings: Roads Wing, Transport Wing and Highways
Wing each entrusted with the following specific functions and responsibilities.
2.3

Roads wing of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways deals with

development and maintenance of National Highways in the country. The Main

responsibilities of Road Wing are as follows:
Planning, development and maintenance of National Highways in the
country.
Extends technical and financial support to State Governments for the
development of State roads and the roads of inter-State connectivity and
economic importance.
Evolves standard specifications for roads and bridges in the country.
Serves as a repository of technical knowledge on roads and bridges.

2.4

Transport Wing of the Ministry deals with matters relating to Road Transport.

The Main responsibilities of Transport Wing are as follows:

Motor Vehicle legislation,

Administration of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Taxation of motor vehicles, compulsory insurance of motor vehicles,
administration of the Road Transport Corporations Act, 1950.
Promotion of Transport co-operatives in the field of motor transport.
Evolves road safety standards in the form of a National Policy on Road
Safety and by preparing and implementing the Annual Road Safety Plan.
3

Collects, compiles and analyses road accident statistics and takes steps for
developing a Road Safety Culture in the country by involving the members of
public and organizing various awareness campaigns.
Provides grants-in-aid to Non-Governmental Organisations in accordance
with the laid down guidelines.

2.5

Highways Wing of the Ministry deals with following:

All policy issues relating to Public-Private-Partnership (PPP) Project in Roads

and Highways sector.
Policy matters, relating to toll (user fee).
Policy

matters

&

programme

management

for

National

Highways

Development Project (NHDP).

Central Engineering Service (Roads) cadre management.
Processing proposals relating to PPP projects of M/RT&H.

2.6

National Highways Development Project (NHDP) is being implemented by

National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) an autonomous body under the Ministry
of Road Transport & Highways and constituted by an Act of Parliament to develop,
maintain and manage the National Highways vested in or entrusted to, it by the Central
Government.

2.7

The Annual Report (2009-2010) of the Ministry provides the administrative set up

of NHAI. According to it, NHAI, which became operational in February, 1995 is headed
by a Chairman under whom there are five full time Members namely Member
(Administration), Member (Finance), two Members (Projects) and Member (Technical).
There are four part time (ex-officio) Members of the Authority namely Secretaries of the
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Department of Expenditure, Planning
Commission and the Director General (Road Development) from the Ministry of Road
Transport & Highways. The Members are assisted by officers at the level of Chief
General Managers, General Managers, Deputy General Managers and Managers. The
Authority has its field offices in the form of Project Implementation Units (PIUs) and
Corridor Management Units (CMU) spread all over the country. These units are headed
by Project Directors who are responsible for the implementation of various NHDP
projects and Operation & Maintenance of completed stretches. All procurements related
4

to civil contractors, supervision of consultants etc. are done by the Head Office. Project
Directors are responsible for pre-construction activities including land acquisition, utility
shifting and liaison with State Governments/Central Government organizations for
successful implementation of the projects.

2.8

In the background material furnished to the Committee, the Ministry of Road

Transport and Highways provided the organizational structures of Ministry of Road

Transport and Highways and its attached/ subordinate offices as follows:

Minister
Minister of State

Minister of State
Secretary

Additional
Secretary and
Financial
Advisor

Chief
Controller of
Accounts

Joint
Secretary
(T&G, CVO &
IT Manager)

Joint
Secretary
(Highways)

General
Administratio
n, Motor
Administrativ
Vehicle
e matters of
Legislation,
NHAI, Policy
Road
and
Transport &
Programme of
Safety, O&M
National
Official
Highways,
Language,
Public Private
Vigilance,
Partnership
Grievances,
matters
E-Governance
and EDP Cell

Joint
Secretary
(LA&C)

International
Cooperation,
Coordination,
Land
Acquisition
for National
Highway
projects, all
Toll issues,
Environment
and Forest
Clearances,
Expressway
Authority of
India and
National
Highway
Tribunal

Joint
Secretary
(Estt.)

Director
General (RD)
& Special
Secretary

Advisor
(Transport
Research)

Collection,
Compilation
and
Development
dissemination
&
of statistics of
All
Maintenance
transport,
Establishment
of National
economic/
matters
Highways
Statistical
including CES
other than
analysis of
Central Sector
(Roads)
date for policy
Roads and
planning,
Central Funds
transport
coordination,
etc

1. Regional
Offices at
Bangalore,
Guwahati,
Lucknow,
Jaipur,
Kolkata,
Mumbai,
Bhopal,
Bhubaneswar,
Hyderabad,
Thiruvananthapuram,
Chandigarh

Accounts,
Budget &
Work Study

2. ELOs at
Raipur, and
Dehradun

2.9.

A perusal of organizational structure by the Committee revealed that planning,

development and maintenance of National Highways in the country is the mandate of

the Roads Wing of the Ministry whereas programme management of National
6

Highways Development Project has been entrusted to Highways Wing of the Ministry.
When asked about the merit of allotting work related to National Highways to two
different wings and the level of coordination between those, the Ministry of Road
Transport and Highways, in a written reply stated:
The allocation of work between the two wings has been done in such a manner
that there is no conflict or duplication. Roads wing is responsible for monitoring
the ongoing NHDP projects while the Highways wing is responsible for policy
matter, appraisal by Public Private Partnership Appraisal Committee (PPPAC)
and approval by Governments.

CHAPTER III
FINANCIAL ASPECTS IN DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECTS

(i)

BUDGETARY ALLOCATION

3.1

According to the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, the details of Budget

Estimates for plan and Non-plan for 2009-10 are as follows:

Budget Estimates for 2009-10 (Plan & Non-Plan)

Numeric
Code

Description
REVENUE SECTION (Non-Plan)

3054

BE
2009-2010
` in crs

There is no separate head for NHAI for the

requirements of funds against Maintenance & Repair
(M&R) of National Highways entrusted to it and on
which civil construction is yet to start. The MoRT&H
releases funds to NHAI out of its overall allocation

340.00

under M&R head.

Total Major Head 3054

340.00

CAPITAL SECTION (Plan)

5054

Capital Outlay on Roads and Bridges (NH)

National Highways Authority of India

01.00.54

Investment (Cess)

1.03

Capital Grants for Externally Aided Works

01.03.53

Major Works

7075

Loans for other Transport Services (Plan)

NHAI (Externally Aided Schemes)

02.00.55

Loans and Advances

68.00

Total

8918.45

8578.45

272.00

As stated by the Ministry, the following Budget Heads for Estimates are not specifically
mentioned in the prescribed format-

Additional Budgetary Support

200.00

IEBR (Borrowings by NHAI)

5000.00

Total Major Head

5200.00

3.2

As desired by the Committee, the Ministry further furnished the following

statements for Budget Estimates (2010-2011) and Expenditure (upto 28th February
2011) under Plan and Non-Plan Head:
PLAN HEAD
Allocation and expenditure of important schemes (included in the Annual Plan) of
the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways during the financial year 2010-11

Sl No

Name of the scheme

Budget
Estimates

Revised
Estimates

(` in crores)
Expenditure
upto
28/02/11

EAP NHAI
a) Externally Aided (NHAI)
b) Loan to NHAI
c) EAP under Road Wing
Sub-total EAP NHAI
a) National Highways (Original)
Works) (Rs. 200 crore for NE
states from MH 4552)

320.00
80.00
100.00
500.00
3958.10

320.00
80.00
1.00
401.00
4656.10

240.00
60.00
0.00
300.00
3120.46

b) Travel Expenses (Rs. 2.00

crore)
c)
Machinery & equipment
(Rs.15.00 crore)

2.00

2.00

0.91

15.00

5.00

0.01

Sub-total - Other Schemes

Funds for National Highways in
Naxalite affected area

3975.10
1000.00

4663.10
750.00

3121.38
578.21

Rail-cum-Road
bridge,
Munger, Bihar
Development of VijayawadaRanchi Road

100.00

100.00

0.00

100.00

20.00

0.00

*Works under BRDB

(Rs.650.00 cr +Rs.50.00 cr
from MH 4552) RE (Rs.785.00
cr+Rs.65.00 cr from MH 4552

700.00

760.00

523.13

7
8

Other charges
Development of information
technology
(i)* BRDB - Strategic Roads
(ii) Strategic Roads under
Roads Wing

0.50
3.50

0.50
3.50

0.01
1.10

100.00
5.00

95.00
1.00

48.07
0.00

3
4
5

10
11

R&D Planning studies

Professional Organisation (Rs.
1.00 crore)/ Training (Rs. 0.50
crore)
Charged expenditure
NHAI (investment)
a) E&I for States from CRF
b) E&I - POSCO
e) E&I for UTs from CRF
Sub-total - E&I
a) *SARDP-NE(*) to BRDB
b) SARDP-NE to RPAO,
Guwhati
c) SARDP - Other Admn.
Expenses
SARDP-NE
NHAI (Remittance of toll
receipts
Grand Total

12
13
14

15

16

(*)

6.00
1.50

6.00
1.50

0.57
0.00

6.00
7848.98
195.75
20.00
14.67
230.42
433.00
1057.00

6.00
8440.94
208.27
20.00
15.61
243.88
433.00
1057.00

0.21
5886.25
101.42
0.00
0.00
101.42
231.77
320.96

10.00

10.00

0.63

1500.00
1623.00

1500.00
1623.00

553.36
969.64

17700.00

18615.42

12083.35

Special Accelerated Road Development Program in the North-Eastern Region

NON-PLAN
Allocation and expenditure of important schemes (not included in the Annual
Plan) of the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways during the year 2010-11

Sl No

4
5

Name of the scheme

Budget
Estimates

CRF(*) for States

CRF for Delhi
CRF for Pondicherry
CRF for A&N Islands
CRF for Chandigarh
CRF for Dadra & Nagar Haveli
CRF for Daman & Diu
CRF for Lakshadweep
Sub-total - CRF
Maintenance and repairs of
National Highways - Roads
Wing
*Maintenance and repairs of
National Highways entrusted
to Border Roads Wing
NH Tribunals
NH Administration

other
10

Revised
Estimates

(Rs in crores)
Expenditure
upto
28/02/11

1819.17
54.89
8.60
3.70
3.98
1.86
1.41
0.14
1893.75
1022.86

2635.52
58.40
9.15
3.94
4.23
1.98
1.50
0.15
2714.87
1989.46

1862.36
54.89
3.14
1.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1921.48
659.99

34.00

65.00

21.19

1.77
2.00

1.75
1.00

0.28

charges
Equipment & Machinery (NonPlan)
Permanent
International
Association
of
Road
Congress, Paris (PIARC)
Works
financed
from
Permanent Bridge Fee Fund

6
7

8
9

Cost of collection
payable to States

of

fee

Total
* Expenditure upto 31/01/11
(*)
Central Road Fund

3.3

0.50

3.00

0.00

0.06

0.06

0.00

120.00

120.00

92.30

0.50

0.50

0.02

3075.44

4895.64

2695.26

Responding to a query from the Committee on the broad details on which

estimates are based, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways submitted the
following in its written reply:Head

Broad details on which estimates are based

Maintenance

& For maintenance of the NH stretches entrusted to NHAI and on

Repairs (M&R)

which civil construction is yet to start, M&R funds are spent.

Besides this, a onetime expenditure on maintenance of NH
stretches not forming part of any phasing of NHDP and funds for
OR & PR of National Highways entrusted to NHAI.

Investment (Cess)

The investment relates to the allocation of cess funds out of CRF

as per the distribution formula given in CRF Act. These funds are
utilized by NHAI to meet the expenditure on construction of the
projects, Annuity payments and servicing of debt.

External

The estimate of External Assistance is based on the likely

Assistance

expenditure to be incurred on the Externally Aided Projects.

Additional

ABS for specific Projects in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal.

Budgetary Support
(ABS)
IEBR

(Borrowings To meet the shortfall of likely expenditure over the resources,

by NHAI)

NHAI has to borrow from market through an instrument of 54 EC

11

Capital Gains Exemption Bonds and direct loan from the

multilateral agencies (ADB).

3.4

The Committee had sought the original estimates, revised estimates and actual

expenditure under each sub-head during each of preceding three years together with
reasons for variations. In this regard, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, in a
written reply, furnished detailed statements to the Committee, which are enclosed at
Annexure I, II & III.

3.5

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways also added during

briefing:
.our expenditure under other heads is extremely high. In fact, last year, for the
national highways development, which is done under a planned scheme NH(O)
by the Department through the State Governments, our expenditure has been far
more than what was provided in the Budget Estimates for 2008-2009. This year
also, progress is extremely satisfactory. In fact, under that particular scheme,
which is the major scheme, we have already released about 50 per cent. Overall
our expenditure is about 40 per cent as of now. So, this reflects that the sector
has the potential of absorbing more funds and we have constraint of resources
particularly with regard to maintenance of National Highways. We are receiving
only `1000 crore, that too with the additional allocation of about `200 to `250
crore after the supplementaries....

12

(ii)

3.6

RESOURCE MOBILIZATION

A part of the fuel cess is allocated to the NHAI to fund the implementation of the

NHDP. The fund allocated from the cess is leveraged to borrow additional funds from
the domestic market. The Government of India has also taken loans for financing
various projects under the NHDP from the World Bank (US$ 1,965 million), Asian
Development Bank(ADB) (US$ 1,605 million) and Japan Bank for International
Cooperation (32,060 million yen), which are passed on to the NHAI partly in the form of
grant and partly as loan. The NHAI has also availed a direct loan of US $149.78 million
from the ADB for the Surat-Manor Expressway Project.

Financial Structure of NHAI

Year

Cess fund

External
grant

Assista
nce
loan

2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11 (BE)

3269.70
6407.50
6541.50
6972.50
7404.70
7848.98
(8440.94) RE

2400.00
1582.50
1788.80
1515.00
272.00
320.00

500.00
395.50
447.20
379.00
68.00
80.00

Amounts in ` Crore
Borrowings Ploughing back of
Funds deposited
by NHAI in CFI
against toll
collection,
Negative Grant &
Revenue Sharing
1289.00
1500.00
305.20
1096.30
1148.05
7455.00
1623.00

3.7
Total cost of NHDP has been estimated to be `54,000 Crore or US$ 13.2 billions
whose components are as below:Total Cost

`54,000 Crores

Likely sources

`Cr. (On 1999 prices) US$ Billions (On 1999 prices )

US$ 13.2 Billion

Cess on Petrol and Diesel

20,000

4.90

External assistance

20,000

4.90

Market borrowings

10,000

2.40

Private Sector Participation

4,000

1.00

13

3.8

From the website of the Ministry, the Committee gathered that the National

Highways Authority of India (NHAI) proposes to finance its projects by a host of

financing mechanisms. Some of them are explained as follows :

(i) Through budgetary allocations from the Government of India i.e. Cess:
In a historic decision, the Government of India introduced a Cess on both
Petrol and Diesel. This amount at that time (at 1999 prices) came to a total of
approximately `2,000 crores per annum. Further, Parliament decreed that the
fund so collected were to be put aside in a Central Road Fund (CRF) for
exclusive utilization for the development of a modern road network. The
developmental work that it could be tapped to fund, and the agencies to whom it
was available were clearly defined as :
1.Construction and Maintenance of State Highways by State Governments.
2.Development of Rural Roads by State Governments
3.Construction of Rail over- bridges by Indian Railways
4.Construction and Maintenance of National Highways by NHDP and Ministry of
Road Transport & Highways
At present, the Cess contributes between ` 5 to 6 Thousand crore per annum
towards NHDP.
(ii) Loan assistance from international funding agencies:
Loan assistance is available from multilateral development agencies like
Asian Development Bank and World Bank or Other overseas lending agencies
like Japanese Bank of International Co - Operation.
(iii) Market borrowing:
NHAI proposes to tap the market by securities cess receipts.
(iv) Private sector participation:
Major policy initiatives have been taken by the Government to attract
foreign as well as domestic private investments. To promote involvement of the
private sector in construction and maintenance of National Highways, some
Projects are offered on Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) basis to private
agencies. After the concession period ,which can range up to 30 years, this road
is to be transferred back to NHAI by the Concessionaries. NHAI funds are also
leveraged by the setting up of Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs).The SPVs will
be borrowing funds and repaying these through toll revenues in the future. This
model will also be tried in some other projects. Some more models may emerge

14

in the near future for better leveraging of funds available with NHAI such as
Annuity, which is a variant of BOT model.

3.9

Highway projects are characterized by back-ended cash flows and require term

loans of longer period (10 to 20 years) with back-ended repayment structure. However,
there is dearth of long-term structured sources of funds. When asked about the steps
taken by the Ministry to assist private investors in taking long-term structured loans, the
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has stated in a written reply as under:
It is true that highway projects awarded on PPP mode have back ended cash
flows which require term loans of longer maturity. Highway concessions have
tenures extending up to 30 years and they need loan facilities extending for up to
75-80% of such tenure. Unfortunately both capital market as well as institutional
mechanisms appear to have constraints in providing such credit to infrastructure.
Availability of pure project finance for funding the debt requirement has remained
an issue for road SPVs, which are formed to execute these projects. In the
absence of project finance, SPVs have to look at commercial banks for debt.
More than 80% of the road sector projects are funded by commercial banks. In
view of the Assets Liability Mismatch (ALM) of Banks, they are not able to
provide long-term debt (generally taken as average maturity of more than or
equal 10 years). Further, due to the structure of the concession agreement, debt
provided by the lenders is classified as unsecured debt, which comes along with
its own set of issues like maturity profile and exposure norms.
NHAI had made the following suggestions before the B.K. Chaturvedi
Committee in the context of availability of long-term finance for highway projects:
(i)

Creation of a Road Finance Corporation;

(ii)

Encouragement of takeout financing;

(iii)

Banks should be allowed to treat bonds or loans at par where it involves

infrastructure financing and invest also in unrated and unlisted bonds;

(iv)

Long term infrastructure bonds issued by SPVs (with maturity more than 5
years) held by banks and insurance companies should be allowed to be
classified under Held-to-Maturity (HTM) category; and

(v)

Ministry of Finance may ask RBI about the validity of the Escrow and
Substitution agreement as a valid security for secured loan.
15

3.10

Asked to state whether any advice has been sought from the Ministry of Finance/

Planning Commission on this matter, the Ministry submitted in the affirmative and their
response was as under:
a)

MoF observed that most financing related issues, such as availability of

long term debt, have already been raised before MoF in other fora. High Level
Committees such as the Deepak Parekh Committee, Patil Committee, Percy S.
Mistry Committee and Raghuram Rajan Committee have also made several
recommendations on the subject. These are structural issues which cannot be
tackled with institution specific solutions. These recommendations are already
being pursued by MoF and several of them are at various stages of
implementation.
b)

It has been the general view of MoF that issues involving financial

regulation and Regulatory bodies should be resolved, as far as possible, through

consensus. In fact, in order to discuss and evolve consensus on issues relating
to infrastructure financing, a High Level Standing Committee on Infrastructure
Finance has also been set up under the Chair of the Finance Secretary, with
representation from various stakeholder groups.
c)

Besides these overarching observations, MoF also made the following

comments in respect of the specific issues raised:

(i)

Creation of a Road Finance Corporation: A new financial intermediary

would not necessarily augment the availability of finance. Moreover, there are
already several existing financial institutions for this purpose;
(ii)

Take-out financing: FM has already made an announcement in Budget

2009-10 on this subject. A Scheme of Takeout financing has already been

formulated by IIFCL and approved by the Empowered Committee;
(iii)

Banks investment in unrated and unlisted infrastructure bonds: This issue

may be of particular relevance to the small to mid-sized developers who seek to

bid for larger projects. Banks are exposed to risks of non-recourse financing of
the infrastructure SPVs. At present, 10% of non-SLR investments of banks are
already allowed in unrated instruments and entire 10% is now allowed to be
invested in unrated infrastructure bonds. Unrated claims on corporate in excess
of Rs 10 crore attract a risk weight of only 100% at present (150% prior to
November 2008);
16

(iv)

Classification of infrastructure bonds of SPVs under HTM category:

Adoption of Accounting Standard 13 (AS 13), which is mandatory from 2011,

may solve this problem;
(v)

Validity of escrow and substitution agreements as valid security: This

issue could be taken up with RBI for consideration.

17

(iii)

3.11

PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP

Traditionally, the road projects were fully financed and controlled/ supervised by

the Government. The implementation of road projects was purely dependent on the
availability/ allocation of funds out of the budget of the Government. It was assessed, at
the time of the preparation of the Tenth Plan that for National Highways alone,
`1,65,000 crore was required for removal of the deficiencies. It is in this context that
alternative innovative means of financing have gained importance for providing an
adequate and sustained support for financing the road projects.

3.12

The galloping resource requirements and the concern for efficiency coupled with

various associated externalities have led, in recent times, to an active involvement of

private sectors in Highways projects. With a view to attract private investment in road
development, maintenance and operation, National Highways Act (NH Act) 1956 was
amended in June, 1995. In terms of these amendments, the private persons can invest
in the NH projects, levy, collect and retain fee from users and is empowered to regulate
traffic on such highways in terms of provisions of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.

3.13

During briefing, the Committee inquired about the rationale behind the shift

towards Public-Private Partnership for implementation of National Highways projects. In

this regard, the Secretary stated as below:I would like to mention that in 2005, the Government decided to have a major
policy shift from implementing the project by and large through construction
contract to implementing the project through PPP. This was done primarily to
expand the programme. Since, the Government resources were limited, it was
decided that private sector resources should be utilized wherever possible and
that is how the programme was restructured in 2005-2006.

3.14

The Chairman, NHAI also added the following during evidence:

we began by giving small patches and at that time thinking was that we
could do contracts for even 20 kms and the funding from the cess would be
sufficient for doing the road programme. The original conception was, the NHAI
would be able to undertake NHDP and NHDP was itself conceived as a small
programme. It began only with phase I and Golden Quadrilateral and it was
18

estimated that even if we did 20 kms stretches, tolling would not be so important;
it would be there, but it was not a primary source of funding. NHAI would be fully
funded by the cess collected on diesel. However, in view of the growing
expectations of the people, on which the hon. MPs are themselves responding, it
was felt that the Golden Quadrilateral would not be enough East West,
North-South and other important Corridors were taken up, and NHDP phase III
was taken up, to connect places of economic importance. And, there was a
switch in methodology in two ways. One was, it was realized that Government
would not be able to deploy the massive budgetary resources necessary for
doing these EPC projects. Therefore, if our target is 20 kms a day and if we have
to cover more roads, which is something which we would also like to do, why not
possible get good high speed roads. The cost in todays prices would be
something between `9 to `10 crore per km. varying according to terrain,
number of bridges, structures. In a dry State like Rajasthan we have fewer
bridges and the cost would be lower, and in a State like Bengal or Kerala,
Orissa, the cost would be much higher. So, it would vary. But it would be the
rough cost, Sir.

The expenditure would be like ` 200 crore per day and for

that to be budgeted by the budget, everything to be done in the EPC project, I

am certain that the Chairman and the hon. Members of the Estimates Committee
are well aware that this would be a very large financial burden for the entire
budget to sustain. Therefore, the current approach has been adopted.

3.15

The Committee were further informed through a written note from the Ministry

that the Government has chalked out a massive investment plan in the road sector,
under the National Highways Development Programme (NHDP). During the period
2009-2015 an investment of around `3,31,000/- crore has been planned for extensive
upgradation of National Highways network, predominantly in the PPP mode. PPP in
highway development seeks to tap the resources, expertise and professionalism of
private sector for public development under a framework attractive to both parties. The
framework enables a private entrepreneur to secure reasonable returns at manageable
risk and assures the user adequate service quality at an affordable cost and facilitates
the Government in procuring value for public money. Characteristics of infrastructure
projects such as long gestation periods vest it with higher than normal risks. In a PPP
framework the project risks are allocated to the party that is best equipped to manage
them.
19

3.16

The material further informed as under:

Initially NHDP Projects under Phase-I and II were mostly public funded with
share of PPP not more than 10% cost of the programme. However, with the
experience of positive response from private sectors, it is decided that
henceforth all the NHDP Programmes shall be undertaken through Public
Private Partnership (PPP). However, attracting private investment into road
development programme is dependent on such ventures qualifying to be
commercially viable projects. Private investment may not be forthcoming into
highway projects which carry higher than normal risks or where profitability
parameters have large uncertainty attached to them or where project execution
is rendered difficult due to associated risk factors such as land acquisition
problems etc. For example projects in North-East and other backward areas may
not be attractive to investors. However, it become imperative to leverage the
capacity of Government to manage such risks so as to attract private
entrepreneurs. Higher growth of national economies in recent years have led to
unprecedented demand for infrastructure services in producing goods and
services and in maintaining supply and distribution chains efficient, reliable and
cost-effective. PPPs have also become important to meet the growing demand
for infrastructure services in view of the fact that available funding from
traditional sources in most countries falls far short of the financing needs of their
infrastructure sectors. A typical PPP structure can be quite complex involving
contractual arrangements between a number of parties including the
Government, project sponsor, project operator, financiers, suppliers, contractors,
engineers, third parties (such as in escrow agent), and users. The creation of a
separate commercial venture called a Special Purpose/Project Vehicle (SPV) is
a key feature of most PPPs. The SPV is a legal entity that undertakes a project
and all contractual agreements between various parties are negotiated between
themselves and the SPV. SPVs are also a preferred mode of PPP project
implementation in limited or non-resource situations, where the lenders rely on
the projects cash flow and security over its assets as the only means to repay
debts.

3.17

It was further stated as under:

20

In order to provide an appropriate regulatory and administrative framework as

well as to attract private sector participation and foreign direct investment, Government
of India has initiated a number of innovative steps which involve:(a)

Amendment of the National Highways Act, 1956 allowing private agencies

to build

maintain, manage and operate National Highways for

specified duration. Importantly, the Act provided for tolling by private

agencies to recover costs.
(b)

Creation of NHAI as a statutory body under NHAI Act, 1988 to manage

the NH network on business principles.

(c)

Duty free import of high capacity and modern construction equipment.

(d)

FDI upto 100% in road sector.

(e)

Easier external commercial borrowing norms.

(f)

100% tax exemption in any consecutive 10 years out of 20 years of

operation.

(g)

Provision of subsidy upto 40% of project cost to make projects viable.The

quantum of subsidy to be decided on a case to case basis.

3.18

(h)

Provision of encumbrance free site for work.

(i)

Government to bear the cost and responsibility of

(i)

Project Feasibility Study

(ii)

Land for the right of way and way side amenities

(iii)

Shifting of utilities

(iv)

Environment clearance, cutting of trees etc.

According to the Ministrys website, Implementation of projects under Public

Private Partnership (PPP) has the following advantages:

(i)

Involving private sector leads to greater efficiency.

(ii)

The private sector has more flexible procurement and decision making
procedures and therefore, it can speed up implementation efforts

(iii)

Better quality since the concessionaire (private sector) is to maintain the

road for the period of concession.

21

(iv)

Early completion of the project, since the concessionaire could save

interest and earn early toll (in the case of BOT project) / additional annuity
installments (in the case of Annuity project).

3.19

(v)

No cost overrun (price escalation).

(vi)

The Client (Government/NHAI) does not have the burden of maintaining

the highways.

While there are a number of forms of Public Private Partnership, the common

forms that are popular in India and have been used for development of National
Highways are - Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) Toll basis.
- Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) Annuity basis.
- Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) basis

3.20

In a BOT (Toll) Model, the concessionaire (private sector) is required to meet the

upfront/construction

cost

and

the

expenditure

on

annual maintenance.

The

Concessionaire recovers the entire upfront/construction cost along with the interest and
a return on investment out of the future toll collection. The viability of the project greatly
depends on the traffic (i.e., toll). However, with a view to bridge the gap between the
investment required and the gains arising out of it, i.e., to increase the viability of the
projects, capital grant is also provided (up to a maximum of 40% of the project cost has
been provided under NHDP).

3.21

In an BOT (Annuity) Model, the Concessionaire (private sector) is required to

meet the entire upfront/construction cost (no grant is paid by the client) and the
expenditure on annual maintenance. The Concessionaire recovers the entire
investment and a pre-determined cost of return out of the annuities payable by the
client every year. The selection is made based on the least annuity quoted by the
bidders (the concession period being fixed). The client (Government/NHAI) retains the
risk with respect to traffic (toll), since the client collects the toll.

3.22

The NHAI has also formed Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) for funding road

projects. SPVs are separate legal entities formed under the Companies Act, 1956. It
involves very less cash support from the NHAI in the form of equity/debt; rest of the
funds comes from Ports/Financial Institutions/beneficiary organisations in the form of
22

equities/debt. The amount spent on developments of roads/highways is to be recovered

in prescribed concession period by way of collection of toll fee by SPV.

3.23

On this issue, the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways added

the following during briefing:

BOT toll, the concessionaire collects the toll, build the road and the Government
gives what is called VGF (Viability Gap Funding), up to 40 per cent. Any road
where VGF is within 40 per cent will be bid out on BOT toll. But the roads that
are not viable will go to annuity. The annuity means the concessionaire builds
the road, he does not take any risk of the toll/traffic. He builds at his cost and
every six months, he collects the money in the form of annuity which is the cost
of construction of the road and the Government will toll. There will be a separate
OMT contract for tolling. EPC is a normal construction contract where it is fully
funded by the Government and it is bid out; the lowest rate is given; there is also
escalation based on certain formula. This is broadly the case.

3.24

The Chairman, NHAI further added during briefing:

When we are going on to the PPP mode essentially the NHAI is doing the
feasibility report. We are doing the land acquisition; we are shifting the pipelines,
electric poles and utilities but we may be paying from the Governments kitty only
about 10 per cent of the cost of the road and 90 per cent of the money is brought
in by the private concessionaires and in return he is getting concession for 15 to
20 years on which he is collecting the toll. The toll therefore for the private
constructed roads is paying firstly his interest, his debt, then his profit on his
capital what he is bringing in by way of equity also for the SPV and it is also
paying for the maintenance of the road during that period when it is with him.
So, it is paying both for the cost of the road and cost is recovered within first ten
years or so and then it is paying for the maintenance.

3.25

As Public-Private Partnership (PPP) has emerged as the primary instrument for

implementation of NHDP, the outlay for project under NHDP Phase III to Phase VII
during the period 2005-2015 revealing a radical shift in the financing pattern was
submitted to the Committee as shown below:

23

Outlays under different modes of delivery of NHDP 2005-2015

NHDP

Length in

Phase

Kms

Cost in the Crores

EPC

BOT (Toll)

Total Cost (`
in crores)

BOT
(Annuity)

NHDP III

12,109

76,546

76,546

NHDP IV

20,000

6,950

20,850

27,800

NHDP V

6,500

41,210

41,210

NHDP VI

1,000

16,680

16,680

NHDP VII

2,594

9,638

4,448

16,680

Source: Report of Core Gp: Financing of NHDP

BOT (Toll) and BOT (Annuity) that form PPP projects, account for 98.6% of the
expenditure envisaged on work to be undertaken between 2005-2015 under NHDP
Phase III to NHDP Phase VII. This indicates the emergence of PPP as the preferred
instrument for implementation of NHDP.

3.26

The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways was asked to furnish the status of

BOT projects undertaken so far. The following tabulated statement has accordingly
been furnished:SUMMARY OF BOT TOLL PROJECTS
Status as on 31st January, 2011
Category

Awarded
No. of
Length in
Contracts
km

Total Project
Cost
(Rs Crs)

Completed
No. of
Length in
Contracts
km

NHDP Phase I

454.1

3598

454.1

GQ

373.4

2679.35

373.4

Others

80.7

918.65

80.7

NHDP Phase II

19

992.66

8109.77

14

713.83

NS - EW

16

787.44

6849.77

11

508.63

Others

205.217

1260

205.217

NHDP Phase III

78

6625.17

54009.14

12

666.48

NHDP Phase IV

589

1639.01

NHDP Phase V

19

2300.35

21390.28

152.7

NHDP Phase VII

41

2335

Total

131

11002.40

91081.20

38

1987.11

DoRTH

83.4

30

24

SUMMARY OF BOT ANNUITY PROJECTS

Status as on 31st January, 2011
Category

NHDP Phase I

Awarded
No. of
Length in
Contracts
km
8
475.57

Total Project
Cost
(Rs Crs)
2353.57

Completed
No. of
Length in
Contracts
km
8
476

GQ

382.57

1979

383

Others

93

375

93

NHDP Phase II

20

1029.65

13912.37

436

NHDP Phase III

11

740.9

4559.88

36

NHDP Phase IV

176.3

2498.76

SARDP-NE

111.80

762.00

Total

42

2534.22

24086.58

16

948

NS-EW

As stated by the Ministry, the BOT projects undertaken so far are too few to
make any impact assessment of these projects.

However, it has been generally

experienced that BOT projects report more satisfactory progress than traditional EPC
Projects.

3.27

During the meetings, the Committee had expressed their concern over the slow

progress of awarding projects as well as non-participation of investors in the bidding

process. In this regard, through the post-briefing communication, the Ministry of Road
Transport and Highways has submitted the following reasons for the same:
The global melt down during year 2008 affected NHAIs bid process
substantially and projects put out for bidding received very lukewarm response
from the market. This was primarily due to the inability of developers to raise
necessary finance from the banks and the apprehension that equity market may
also not be positive. The PPP process adopted by NHAI also had teething
problems which set back the award process. These include the following:
a)

Upto year 2005 when majority of NHDP Phase I and Phase II were

awarded NHAI Board was empowered to approve individual project for award.
Pursuant to a decision of the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs in its
meeting on 27th October 2005, a Public Private Partnership Appraisal Committee
(PPPAC) was set up and system of project wise approval through PPPAC for
25

NHDP projects was brought in. Ultimately this process only delayed the award of
NHDP projects.
b)

Changes in project documentation

such

as Model Concession

Agreement (MCA), Request for Qualification (RFQ) and Request for Proposal
(RFP) caused severe disruption of the award process.
c)

From May06 the water fall mechanism was introduced for award of

projects i.e. first, the project is to be procured on BOT basis, if it is not

successful, then the project is to be procured on BOT (Annuity) basis; in case
both the above mechanisms fail, then the project is considered for procurement
on EPC basis. Many of the projects identified were unviable for 4 laning under
BOT (Toll) furthering the delays.
d)

Implementation of some PPP projects was affected by land acquisition

issues and obtaining clearances for tree cutting, shifting of utilities etc.
These issues are now being addressed and some recommendations have
been proposed in the B K Chaturvedi Committee report regarding changes in
MCA, RFQ/RFP clauses. Regarding land acquisition, NHAI is setting up special
land acquisition units and Regional Offices have been set up by NHAI to closely
monitor land acquisition issues.

3.28

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways further clarified during

the briefing:There are also changes in the standard documents which are being used for
awarding these projects to the potential bidders. Model Construction Agreement
(MCA) which is the basic document was revised and the whole new provisions
were introduced. Rather I would say the new MCA itself was introduced in place
of the old MCA, which was being followed by NHAI. With this new MCA projects
are being awarded after February, 2008. Besides, the MCA, the bidding process
was made completely transparent and the bidding documents RFQ and RFP
were standardized. The Planning Commission and the Finance Ministry are
primarily responsible for these documents. They have done it very carefully after
taking into consideration the best practices in the relevant areas all over the
world. Therefore, this process took little time because it was a complete switch
over from the old system to the new. Therefore, the progress in awarding
projects in 2007, may be 2006 was bit slow but in 2008 we had awarded the

26

projects very smoothly. However, I would like to mention that in the second part
of 2008 there was a credit crisis.

3.29

In response to a query about the salient features of New Model Concession

Agreement (MCA) and its comparative advantage with the old MCA, the Ministry of
Road Transport and Highways stated the following in a written communication:
Salient features of New MCA:
Sl.
No.
1.

MCA
Clause

Article

Salient features of New MCA Advantage

2.

Grant
of
Conce
ssion.

The concession period is The economic viability of the

proposed to be determined project
has
been
greatly
on a project-specific basis improved.
depending on the volume of
present and projected traffic.

2.

26.2

Conce
ssion
Fee/P
remiu
m

The
Concessionaire
is
required to spell upfront
negative grant/premium in
place of Revenue Sharing as
in old MCA.

A concept of additional curly

parenthesis and blank space
has been brought in. The
contents
under
curly
parenthesis and blank space
have to be retained. These
provisions can be modified
at the time of signing the
agreement.

Earlier there was provision of

only square bracket and there
was no clarity as to which
provisions are to be retained
and which to be modified for
bidding purpose and agreement
signing purpose.

The negative grant has the

advantage of being simple,
definite and being amenable to
be made part of the capital cost
and consequently of the project
cost for obtaining finance from
lenders. The revenue sharing
model, on the contrary, is more
sophisticated,
complex,
subjective and not amenable to
be brought under the project
cost for obtaining finance.
From NHAIs point of view, an
upfront definite flow adding to
the investible corpus will be far
more desirable than an indefinite
flow of an uncertain value
inflowing at a future date.

29.2.3

Effect
of

When traffic exceeds the In old MCA, on exceeding the

design capacity of the traffic, the Concessionaire had
27

Traffic
Variati
on

project
highway,
the
Authority would prepare a
DPR for augmentation and
assess
the
cost.
The
Concession period would be
extended to such period
which would yield a return of
16% on the augmentation
cost. Such extension of
Concession period shall be
however limited to 5 (five)
years. In the event of refusal
of the Concessionaire to
underake the augmentation,
an indirect political event will
be deemed to occur and the
Authority may terminate the
Concession
making
a
termination
payment
in
accordance with cl. 34.9.2.

to augment the capacity, without

any increase in Concession
period, and on its refusal on
doing so, the project would be
terminated on payment of
termination payment.

4.

48
& Chan Change in ownership is now
7.1(k)
ge in allowed after 2 years of
owner COD.
ship

The provision is likely to ensure

that the construction companies
hands over the job to more
proficient firms in O&M and also
have sufficient cash flow to take
up further assignment.

5.

40.2(b)

Highways are public goods and

no charge can ever be created
on
these.
It
has
no
characteristics of an acceptable
security for lenders. Without
there being a tangible security,
as per RBI norms, lenders have
to classify loans to highway
projects as unsecured.

Assig A charge on the Escrow

nment Account has been permitted.
s and
Charg
es

The new provision compensates

the Concessionaire on required
augmentation. In the bidding
stage, therefore, the bidder is to
consider only the cost of 4laning and not any eventual
augmentation also.

For overcoming handicap the

provision is made permitting
lenders to create a charge on
the Escrow Account to the
extent permissible as per their
priority in the waterfall.
3.30

When asked to comment on the reports that bidding process failed to attract

investors due to severe cash crunch, high cost of borrowing, lack of realistic data in
detailed project reports (DPR) and faulty traffic estimates prepared by NHAI, the
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways stated the following in a written reply:-

28

a)

The phenomena of severe cash crunch, high cost of borrowing and falling

traffic growth was the immediate fall out of the financial market meltdown which
occurred during mid 2009. The world then had to brave one of the harshest
recessions of our times, which has slowed down the global economy. The crisis
has hit India too, though the effect has not been as severe as in many developed
countries. India faced the crisis better because our growth is driven by domestic
demand both consumption and investment. Consumption and saving are well
balanced. In India, the share of private final consumption expenditure in GDP is
around 55 per cent. The Government announced a slew of measures which
moderated the impact of this recession. Currently no trace of such difficulties
remains and there are a large number of entrants eager to enter the road sector.
In fact, NHAI had to put certain measures in place to ensure that non-serious
entrants do not enter the field.

b)

The issue of flawed DPR preparation containing faulty traffic estimates,

though a serious issue, addressed through administrative measures by NHAI,

has not been found to impact the bid response in any way. The developers do
have their own survey processes which effectively counters the ill effects of
NHAIs DPR. Nevertheless, in as much this imposes an unrealistic cap to VGF
outlay by NHAI, this negatively affects the acceptability of marginal projects by
the private sector.

3.31

The Ministry, in their latest reply, has further stated the following:
..With the experience gained over the last few years and following the
acceptance of B. K. Chaturvedi Committee report, The Government has
introduced structural changes in policy, removed irritants in the model
agreements and other documents which has had the affect of revamping the
entire award process of NHDP. Consequently, the award of projects has been
accelerated over 2009-10 and 2010-11 and bids received were highly
competitive and about 77% of the awards have been on BOT (Toll) basis.
During the last nearly 2 years the bidders have submitted positive and
aggressive bids for both BOT (Toll) and BOT (Annuity)..

29

3.32

One of the fundamental problems faced by the private investors is experiments

of Government policy with many formats with varying degree of success. Since, the
Committee argued that the private investment flow into any sector purely depends on
the consistent, long term policy adopted by the Government, the Ministry of Road
Transport and Highways was asked to furnish its response on this issue, and steps
initiated to address the same. The following reply was accordingly furnished by the
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways :Consistency in policy is desirable and infrastructure policy guidelines have been
subjected to many experiments, often seriously disrupting the award process. A
few can be cited for ready reference;

a)

The decision of Committee on Infrastructure (CoI) in 2006 that all

projects, including those in balance for award in Phase II of NHDP, shall in future
be awarded on BOT Toll basis was a paradigm shift in the award process.
Prioritisation in execution of projects thus became dependent on their
attractiveness as commercial ventures. This was conceptually a sea change
since till then construction of road network were primarily driven by the intention
to connect the whole country through a chain of roads, primarily to the network of
GQ and the Corridors. Admittedly the Planning Commissions objective in
revising the design template was perhaps with the intent of bridging the gap
between actual and potential resources. But the fact remains that world over
PPP mode road infrastructure development is only a fraction of the whole, as
against the Indian experiment which places the same as the predominant mode.
Public acceptance of toll payment would be a critical issue, given that the public
already pays a fuel cess and while some stretches are toll free, the rest are
subjected to toll.

b)

Initially, the Governments direction was that all projects are first to be bid

out as BOT(Toll) and upon failure to attract an acceptable bid to be then bid out
as BOT (Annuity) and failing that to taken up on EPC mode with specific
approval of CCEA. For the market this posed a huge challenge, since estimating
the cost of a project involves considerable expense and each such stage needed
that at least part of these expenses be repeated. Perhaps as a reaction to this,
the market reacted by non-participation to NHAI bids. During 2008 end, bid

30

invitation for 60 projects by NHAI resulted in only 12 projects receiving

acceptable bids. Fortunately, policy changes brought out under B.K. Chaturvedi
Committee recommendations brought order to this process.

c)

By 2005, NHAI had already awarded/ was in the process of awarding

nearly 50 BOT projects, when Planning Commission sought to introduce a new

Model Concession Agreement. It was felt that at the execution level, this MCA
introduced provisions which had a high level of subjectivity. Many rounds of
discussion were held with all stakeholders by NHAI to evince their response.
Once a cogent response coalesced, interaction with Planning Commission was
held, wherein difficulties with regard to legal, financial and technical parameters
specified in the said MCA was opened up for discussion.

Some critical

observations were also given by the World Bank. These were not agreed to by
Planning Commission. Similarly model RFQ/ RFP were issued by Ministry of
Finance. Many of the provisions were severely restrictive and after substantial
dislocation was seen to have been caused, at NHAIs instance, policy changes
were once again sought and were brought out under BKC Committee
recommendations which brought the required order to these processes.

3.33

When asked to state the steps taken to attract private investors in the bidding

process, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways informed the Committee as
follows:
India today is a leading destination for infrastructure spend and, underscored by
the aspirations laid out in the Eleventh Five Year Plan, this sector offers
tremendous growth potential. Highways have a large shelf of projects which can
be readily offered to the market including those which had a serious setback last
year due to the global financial meltdown. Given our historical underinvestment
in highway infrastructure and the role this sector can play in stimulating
economic growth, we believe it imperative that adequate investment flows are
attracted to this segment. It is also felt that, in this discontinuous time, players
looking to finance highway infrastructure spend would benefit from a fresh
assessment of the opportunity. They have to be convinced that notwithstanding
the structural challenges, the profit pool remains large and attractive, with
potential for players to enlarge exposures. For the investment levels the highway
sector requires, domestic sources would need to be supplemented with
31

overseas. To achieve this objective, in the domestic front investment business

conclaves was held in association with CII which generated huge interest in the
industry. After deliberations with knowledgeable players in the market, a series
of investment business conclaves through road shows in major overseas
investment centres were also held. So far such road shows have been held in
Singapore, Zurich, London & New York. The response we have received is
highly encouraging and we have had a number of enquiries and clarificatory
mails, from PE funds, sectoral funds investing in infrastructure and other large
investors. NHAI is receiving a series of enquiries from participants. Discussion
at Singapore with representatives from Malaysia has resulted in negotiations for
signing an MOU with Government of Malaysia for cooperation in the road
sector.
3.34

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways further added the

following during the latest evidence:

Certain changes have been already brought about the certain changes are
going to be brought about in order to bring in greater transparency and to ensure
that awards of projects are beyond question. There had been complaints that for
qualifications, certain companies were being disqualified on small grounds,
procedural grounds. NHAI worked over the last few months and has now come
out with a system for having annual pre-qualifications so that for individual
projects, the companies which are already pre-qualified need not apply for prequalification and need not submit complete documentation, based on which
some procedural error could be there and they may not be pre-qualified
The annual pre-qualification, it is hoped, will be completed over the
period of next two months. Thereafter, it will be applicable till December of next
year and from October, the new pre-qualification for the whole of one year would
again start. The initial response from the concessionaire has been good in that
regard.

3.35

The Economic Survey (2010-11) document provided the following latest facts

acts on the financing pattern of the NHDP:

The EGoM has since given the in-principle approval for Work Plan II for 2010-11
for award of projects covering a length of about 12,000 km and also has
32

approved additional budgetary support for the SARDP-NE and J&K projects. The
EGoM has also approved the Work Plan for 2010-11 onwards with the stipulation
that of the total NH length to be developed, broadly 60 per cent would be taken
up on build, operate, and transfer (BOT) (Toll) basis, 25 per cent on BOT
(Annuity)

basis,

and

theremaining

15

per

cent

on

engineering

procurementcontract (EPC) basis.

The Government of India has also taken loans for financing various projects
under the NHDP from the World Bank (US$ 1965 million), Asian Development
Bank(ADB) (US$ 1605 million), and Japan Bank for International Cooperation
(32,060 million yen) which are passed on to the NHAI partly in the form of grants
and partly as loan. The NHAI had also availed a direct loan of US $ 149.78
million from the ADB for the Surat Manor Expressway Project.

3.36

While examining the issue concerning financing infrastructure, the Committee

made a detailed study of a Report entitled Financing Infrastructure Addressing

Constraints and Challenges prepared by the World Bank in June 2006, which inter alia
stated the following:
There exists an urgent need for specialized infrastructure financing institutions
such as Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services (IL&FS) and Infrastructure
Development Finance Corporation (IDFC) to participate at the design stage of a
project. The backing of such institutions at an early stage would carry at least
two advantages. First, it would make it easier for project developers to obtain
finance from other sources. Second, it would provide the developer with the
opportunity to use the expertise of such institutions in project designing and
financial structuring.

3.37

It added further as under:

In addition, each Ministry substantively dealing with infrastructure should adopt
the practice introduced by the Ministry of Power by setting up Inter-Institutional
Groups (IIG). These would consist of the infrastructure developers and senior
representatives from banks and FIs. Under the leadership of the Secretary of the
concerned Ministry, the IIGs would meet once a month to discuss the progress
of specific infrastructure projects and to resolve any outstanding issues or
33

disputes between the developers and various funding agencies. This experiment
has been very successful in the case of Power and should be replicated in other
key Ministries.

34

CHAPTER IV
ISSUES IN IMPLEMENTATION OF NATIONAL HIGHWAYS DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT

(i)

NHDP (NATIONAL HIGHWAYS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT)

4.1

The National Highways have a total length of 70,934 km to serve as the arterial

network of the country. As per the Economic Survey (2010-11) document, about 25
percent of the total length of National Highways is single lane/intermediate lane, about
52 percent is two lane standard and the balance 23 per cent is four lane standard or
more. The development of National Highways is the responsibility of the Government of
India, which in turn, has launched major initiatives to upgrade and strengthen National
Highways through various phases of National Highways Development Project (NHDP),
which are briefly as under:

National Highways Development Project (NHDP) Phases-I & II:

4.2

NHDP Phase I and II comprises of the development of National Highways to 4/6

lane standards of the following routes:

(a)Golden Quadrilateral (GQ) connecting 4 major metropolitan cities viz. DelhiMumbai-Chennai-Kolkata-Delhi.
(b)North South & East West Corridors (NS-EW) connecting Srinagar to
Kanyakumari and Silchar to Porbandar with a spur from Salem to Cochin.
(c)Road connectivity of major ports of the country to National Highways.
(d)Other National Highway stretches.

4.3

NHDP Phase I, which was approved by CCEA in December, 2000 at an

estimated cost of `30,300 crore (1999 prices) comprises 5,846 km of Golden

Quadrilteral, 981 km of NS-EW corridors, 356 km of Port connectivity and 315 km of
other National Highway, a total of 7,498 km.

4.4

Phase II, which was approved in December, 2003 at an estimated cost of

`34,339 crore (2002 prices) comprises mostly NS-EW Corridor (6,161 km) and other
National Highways of 486 km length, the total length being 6,647 km.

35

NHDP Phase-III:
4.5

The Government has approved 4/6 laning of 12,109 km of National Highways on

Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT) basis at an estimated cost of `80,626 crore under
NHDP Phase III. The phase has been approved in two parts i.e. Phase III - A consisting
total length of 4,815 km at an approved cost of `33,069 crore and Phase III - B,
consisting total length of 7,294 km at an approved cost of `47,557 crore. The scheduled
date of completion of NHDP Phase III is December, 2013. Under this phase, the
stretches have been identified as per the following criteria:
(i)High density traffic corridors not included in Phase I & II
(ii)Providing connectivity of State capitals with NHDP (Phase I & II)
(iii)Connectivity of centres of tourism and places of economic importance.
Against 12,109 km, a length of 1190 km has already been four laned up to 31.12.2009
and a length of 3170 km is under implementation.

NHDP Phase - IV
4.6

This Phase envisages upgradation of about 20,000 km of National Highways to

2-lane with paved shoulders under NHDP. This phase was approved by the
Government in July, 2008. Out of approved length of 20,000 kms which is to be
implemented in a phased manner in stretches of 5000 kms each, the Ministry of Road
Transport and Highways is implementing the first Phase i.e. NHDP Phase IV A,
upgradtion/strengthening of 5,000 km of single/intermediate/two lane National
Highways to two lane with paved shoulders on BOT (Toll) and BOT (Annuity) basis.

NHDP Phase - V
4.7

Six laning of 6,500 km of existing 4 lane National Highways under NHDP Phase

V (on Design Build Finance Operate (DBFO) basis was approved in October, 2006. Six
laning of 6,500 km includes 5,700 km of GQ and 800 km of other stretches. Against
6500 km, a length of 148 km has already been six laned up to 31 st December, 2009
and a length of 886 km is under implementation.

NHDP Phase - VI
4.8

NHDP Phase VI envisages development of 1,000 km fully access controlled

expressways under Public Private Partnership (PPP) model following DBFO approach.
Phase VI of NHDP was approved at an estimated cost of `16,680 crore in November,
2006. NHAI has appointed a consultant for carrying out feasibility study for Vadodara

36

Mumbai, Delhi Meerut, Bangalore Chennai and Kolkata Dhanbad Expressways.

The study will be completed by May, 2010 for two stretches, namely Bangalore
Chennai & Kolkata Dhanbad. Vadodara Mumbai & Delhi Meerut Expressways will
be completed by March, 2010. The total fund required for this phase is `16,680 crore,
out of which `9,000 crore will come from private sector and the balance `7680 crore will
be Government funding for bridging the viability gap as well as meeting the cost of land
acquisition, utility shifting, consultancy, etc. The entire project is targeted to be
completed by December, 2015.

NHDP Phase - VII

4.9

Government approved construction of standalone Ring Roads, Bypass, Grade

Separators, Flyovers, elevated roads, tunnels, road over bridges, underpasses, service
roads etc on BOT (Toll) mode under NHDP Phase VII in December, 2007 at an
estimated cost of `16,680 crore. 36 stretches in different States have been proposed to
be taken up. Proposal for 4 lane elevated road from Chennai port to Maduravoyal in
Tamil Nadu costing `1485 crore approved by PPPAC in August, 2008. RFQ proposals
received in October, 2008. Project was awarded in January, 2009. Proposal for
upgradation of NH-7 between Hebbal flyover to New Airport (22 km.) in Bangalore
costing `680 crore was awarded on 8.2.2010.

4.10

Overall status of NHDP, including length completed as on 31 st January, 2011 of

different Phases of NHDP is shown in table below:

Overall status of NHDP
Status as on 31.01.2011
Phases

Total Length
in km

Date of
Approval

I
GQ,EW-NS corridors,
Port connectivity &
others
II
4/6-laning North
South- East West
Corridor, Others
Total phase III (phase
III A + III B)

7,522*

12.12.2000

30,300
(37739.71)

7398

124

6,647

18.12.2003

34,339
(45722.63)

4983

1220

444

12,109

05.03.2005,
27.10.2006 &
12.4.2007

80,626
(21938.01)

2048

5293

4699

37

Approved Cost
Length
Length To be
(Expenditure till Completed under awarded
31.12.10) in Rs
in km
Imp.
Crore

IV
20,000 July -2008 for
2 - laning with paved
5000 km
shoulders
V
6,500
05.10.2006
6-laning of GQ and
High density corridor
VI
1000
02.11.2006
Expressways
VII
700 km of 06.12.2007
Ring Roads, Bypasses ring roads/
and flyovers and other bypass +
structures
flyovers

4.11

27,800

41,210
(7485.53)
16,680
(3.49)
16,680
(0.18)

765

19235

467

1833

4200

NIL

NIL

1000

41

659

At present, National Highway Development Project is being implemented in 7

phases. The present phases under Phase I, II & III envisages improving more than
25,255 km of arterial routes of NH network to international standards. The project wise
details of NHDP phase I, II, III & V are as follows: (status 28th February, 2011)

NHDP

GQ

Total
Length
(Km.)

NS NHDP NHDP NHDP NHDP SARD

EW
NHDP NHDP
Phase Phase Phase Phase P
Ph. I &
Phase
Total
III
V
VI
VII
-NE
II
IV

5,846 7,300 12,109 6,500 1000 700 388

Already 4Laned 5,821 5,560 2,135

(Km.)
Under
Implement
ation
(Km.)

25

Contracts
Under
Implement
ation (No.)

96

Balance
length for
award
(Km.)

421

4.12

490

1,161 5,669 1,992

80

17

14799 48,254

Port
Total by
Conne Others
NHAI
ctivity

380

1383 50,017

14,006

306 932

15,244

41

112

765

9,695

74

431

10,220

210

220

4,305 4,088 1000

659 276 14,034 23,783

20 23,803

The Committee desired to be apprised about the details of awarded NHDP

projects (Underimplementation). In this regard, the Ministry furnished a statement,

given at Annexure IV.

38

4.13

The East West & North South corridor project (NHDP Phase II) was earlier

scheduled to complete in December, 2009. However, the likely date of completion of

project has now been extended to December, 2010. In the material furnished by the
Ministry of Road Transport & Highways in September, 2010, it has been stated that
December 2010 is the likely date of completion of project, inspite of the fact that 514 km
is yet to be awarded. When asked to respond the feasibility of this deadline, the Ministry
of Road Transport and Highways stated that it may not be possible to meet the
deadline fixed for completion of North-South-East-West corridor project as few
stretches are yet to be awarded. Overall current status of NS-EW corridor is as under:
Total Length

7142 km

Completed length

5258 km (74 %)

Under Implementation

1457 km

Balance for award

427 km

NHAI had targeted substantial completion of NS-EW Corridor by December

2010. The actual date of completion can be estimated only after all projects of NS-EW
corridor are awarded. The target date will be revised after further review of the status.
Projects have been delayed due to various reasons like poor performance of
contractors, problems in land acquisition, non availability of forest/environment/railway
clearances, law & order problems in some States etc. Award of projects was also
delayed during 2007-08/ 2008-09 due to overall economic slowdown.

4.14

The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways was asked to furnish details of

awarded NS EW corridor projects (Underimplementation and Completed), which has

accordingly been submitted to the Committee and enclosed at Annexure V

4.15

The Committee also observed that in respect of NHDP phase III B (upgradation,

4/6 laning), which was approved in 12.4.2007 out of total length of 7,294 km, only 10
km has been completed as on 31.8.2010, yet December, 2013 has been kept as the
likely date of project completion.

4.16

The length of Highways awarded by NHAI during the year 2010-11 (up to

January 2011) is 4345 Kms. Briefing the Committee on the targets of NHDP fixed for
the years 2011 and 2012 as well as the progress on the same, the Secretary, Ministry
of Road Transport and Highways stated the following in March, 2011:

39

 .... I would say that during the current year, 2010-11, as against the targets
which had been put for NHAI for completion in NHDP, there was a slow down. I
must concede that there were a couple of CBI cases and raids and that did bring
in a slow down for four to five months, but after that, the organisation is again
geared up and in the last few months, again momentum is there.
4.17

He added further as under:

For the next year, the target which has been put is around 7,300 kilometres of
award, which needs to be done. In the current year, so far the awards have been
close to about 4,900 kilometres and we do hope that by 31 st March 2011, we
should be able to do at least 5,500 kilometres and possibly touch 5,800
kilometres. Seen in the context of what has been done in the past years, this is
way beyond. The previous highest was about 4,700 kilometres. It was 3,600
kms before that, and in certain years it had been close to 900 kms. So, in that
context, it is the highest ever award, which has been there so far. But that is not
to say that we are satisfied. The next years target we have put as 7,300 kms.

40

(ii)

GOLDEN QUADRILATERAL

4.18

The Golden Quadrilateral constitutes an integral component of National

Highways Development project Phase-I connecting four metro cities of Delhi, Mumbai,
Chennai, Kolkata (Figure 1).

Figure: 1

4.19

The Committee were informed by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways

that as per original mandate of task force, the Golden Quadrilateral Project was to be
completed by March 04. However, the CCEA approved the project on 18.12.2000 in
which the date of completion of GQ was mentioned as December03. The date of
completion was further extended to December05 in view of compelling circumstances
41

like delay on account of pre construction activities which includes delay in land
acquisition due to procedural formalities, litigation and court cases, forest clearance,
environment clearance, clearance/ approval from railways. This delay was justified as
the programme of this magnitude was unprecedented and also the construction
industry in road sector was not developed enough to take up the works of such
magnitude.

4.20

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways also added during the

briefing:
So far as the Golden Quadrilateral is concerned, it is going on smoothly in
respect of projects in other phases.

Since the Committee has specifically

decided to pay attention to the Golden Quadrilateral, I would like to mention that
it is almost complete out of 5,846 km., only 115 km. is incomplete. These
stretches were incomplete primarily because of contractual problems.

The

contracts which were awarded originally have become sour. As a result they
had to be terminated. I am sorry to report that they had to be terminated. I am
happy to report that in all the cases, the new contracts have already been
awarded and so, the work is going on smoothly.

4.21

The Committee are further informed that to complete GQ a total number of 128

contracts were awarded, out of which all are completed except 15 projects. The total
length of GQ was 5846 km., out of which 5799 km. length has already been completed.
Targeted date of completion for balance length has been extended to December 2010
due to non-performance by some of the contractors. Their performance during the
currency of original contract was poor and therefore NHAI was compelled to terminate
the contracts. Their contracts were terminated and balance work has been re- awarded.
These contracts are scheduled to be completed from May, 2010 to December, 2010.

4.22

Completed length of Golden Quadrilateral during different years alongwith

corresponding percentage figures are as follows:

42

4.23

YEAR

LENGTH COMPLETED

PERCENTAGE

DEC-2000

648

11.08%

MAR-2004

3100

53.03%

DEC-2007

5501

94.10%

MAR-2009

5721

97.86%

AUG-2010

5799

99.20%

The details of awarded Golden Quadrilateral projects (Underimplementation &

Completed) are given at Annexure VI & VII.

4.24

When enquired about the steps taken to expedite the project completion, the

Ministry of Road Transport and Highways stated, in a written reply that NHAI has
taken several steps to expedite project completion. To strengthen monitoring of the
projects, NHAI has formulated a revised strategy for implementation of projects. As
per this strategy, 10 Regional Offices headed by Chief General Manager (CGM) have
been opened. The Chief General Managers have been delegated financial as well as
administrative powers for execution of works. Further co-ordination between various
state level agencies has also been assigned to the Regional Office. For land
acquisition, special land acquisition cell has been created in HQ and special land
acquisition units involving the State level Officers, who are well-conversant with land
acquisition process, have been engaged for expeditious completion of land
acquisition. Special training is also being imparted to these officers.

4.25 As per the material furnished to the Committee during September, 2010, 6 km
road under Golden Quadrilateral was yet to be given on contract, whereas this project
was scheduled to be completed in September itself. When asked to state the position in
this regard, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways submitted the following in its
written reply:
All stretches under Golden Quadrilateral were awarded. The 6 km stretch yet to
be awarded is the Ennore Expressway project which is part of port connectivity
projects under NHDP Phase I. This stretch could not be awarded so far due to
delay in Land Acquisition and R&R of Project Affected Families (PAFs). The latest
status is as below:

43

(i) Land Acquisition: Total 7.94 Ha land required to be acquired. The

award has been published and compensation is yet to be paid.
(ii) R&R: Total 1824 PAFs were to be shifted. So far 1628 PAFs have
been shifted. The balanced are yet to be shifted.
This stretch was later combined with the other stretches of the Chennai-Ennore
Port Connectivity Project i.e. 9 km Thiruvottiyur Ponneri-Panchetti (TPP) road, 8.1
km Inner Ring Road (IRR), 5.4 km Manali Oil Refinery Road (MORR) and 1.6 km
Ennore Expressway within Port. The bids for the above combined stretch were
cancelled due to non availability of firm financial commitment from Chennai Port
Trust. Bids will now be invited on receipt of equity/loan commitment from Chennai
Port Trust.

4.26

When asked to state whether any system is in place to monitor quality/standards

of the projects completed under Golden Quadrilateral, the Ministry responded in the
written reply that Quality Assurance is an integral part of each project and Supervision
Consultants are being engaged through international bidding process to supervise
quality of work on day to day basis. Regular and mandatory testing of material used in
construction as well as quality of construction is closely monitored. Besides, inspections
are also carried out by NHAI officers, both from field and HQ, from time to time.

4.27

Building Spokes from each of the hub cities of Golden Quadrilateral,

commensurate with the hubs and spokes pattern of transport system considered
essential for the balanced regional development. In this regard, Ministry of Road
Transport and Highways responded that work Plan is under consideration to cover
about top 300 towns in terms of population around hub cities.

44

(iii)

TOLL POLICY

4.28

As informed by the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways, Section 7(1) of NHAI

Act 1956 as amended in 1993 (Act 1 of 1993) empowers the Government to levy fees
for use of sections of National Highways at such rates as laid down in rule made in this
behalf. In 1997 the rules were framed for public funded projects. Section 11 of the rules
provided for collection of fees in perpetuity. The rates provided in the rules for
conversion of projects from 2 lane to 4 lane sections of National Highways were
decided considering the following principles:

4.29

a)

Fee should be as a percentage of savings in vehicle operating cost

b)

Fee should be related to damage caused by vehicles

c)

Fee should be as perceived to be acceptable to the users

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways also added the

following during briefing:

Firstly, I would like to cover the toll policy. The rules for toll policy were laid in
1998 and the basis was this. The Government came out with atoll policy in 1997
and the rules were framed in 1998. What was done was that as a result of the
four-lanning, there is a saving in the vehicle operating cost of the vehicles, toll,
time, etc. It was worked out. 50 per cent of the saving was put as a toll rate.
That was at that time, 40 paise per KM per passenger car. Every year, there
used to be an increase linked with the WPI for private-funded roads and once in
five years for the Government funded roads. Then in 2008, we have come out
with a new policy and it has been amended. While the basic toll rate continues
to be what it was, the increase has been increased 3 per cent plus 40 per cent
of the WPI for the private funded roads and plus every year increase for the
Government funded roads also, which used to be earlier five years and it used to
be sharp like 40-50 per cent; people used to naturally agitate. So, we said, here
also, we will do every year.

4.30

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways further added:

In this policy, somebody has said that we collect cess and toll also, and that it is
a double burden on the people. While in some respects it is true that it has been

45

raised, but this is the users fee and since the amount is inadequate because the
cess goes even for the rural roads, which are not tolled, this is in addition to the
cess but both are independent of each other. Every road is not subjected to toll;
only those roads that are through-traffic and that carry commercial traffic, they
are tolled; most of the roads still remain untolled.

4.31

The Committee wanted to know about the changes, which have taken place in

Toll Policy in recent times. In this regard, Ministry submitted the following in a written
reply:-

i) In the year 2008, when the new fee rules of 2008 were published in
supersession of fee rules of 1997, the base rate of 1997 was considered after
indexation. Further, two separate category of vehicles i.e. Multi Axle Vehicles
(3 to 6 axles) and oversized vehicles (more than 6 axles) were introduced.
ii) The fee is to be collected in Perpetuity, as per rules. (Refer rule 6 (6) of new
fee rules, 2008)
iii) As per new fee rules, 2008, the distance between two fee plazas should be 60
Kms. Other conditions for setting up the fee plazas are provided in rule 8 of the
new fee rules, 2008.
iv) In the new fee rules of 2008, it is provided that fee shall be revised every year
effective from 1st April based on, a) 3% fixed increase and b) 40% of the
change in Whole Sale Price Index (WPI).
v) Before publication of fee rules of 2008, in case of Public Funded projects, fee
shall be revised after every five years based on change in WPI and in case of
BOT projects as per the provisions of the concession agreement.
vi) On the basis of the feedback received from the stakeholders as well as the
experience gained during implementation, some proposals are under
consideration of the Government.

4.32

In respect of New fee rules, 2008, the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and

Highways also elaborated:

.In the old policy, there are certain ambiguities. But the new toll policy clearly
says that first of all the toll gates would not be allowed generally within 10 KMs of
the municipal limits; so, there will be no toll gate, but in any case, it cannot be

46

within less than 5 KMs; then, between two toll plaza, there will be no toll at all;
one can move freely so that the local people are not put to any inconvenience.
Generally the distance between one toll plaza and another will be 80-100 KM.
This is what the new toll policy says. In fact the new toll policy tries to rationalize
many problems which were existing, in the old policy. That is one of the reasons.
In the earlier policy, the toll gates were there between 15-20 KMs, unfortunately
what happens whatever has been done under the old toll policy, we are
governed by the agreement; it is very difficult for us to do anything because it
was an agreement with the private party and the Government; and that has to be
honoured.

4.33

When asked to comment on the complaints regarding pilferage of revenue as

well as non-compliance of contract condition in respect of Toll collection, the Ministry of

Road Transport and Highways stated that presently, the toll collection work in NHAI is
being carried out through DGR sponsored Ex. Servicemen on EPC projects. Several
complaints regarding pilferage of revenue and non compliance of contract conditions
have been received and after investigations some of them have been found correct,
due to which NHAI had to either impose penalty or prematurely terminate the contract
or both. Therefore, the Ministry has come up with New Policy for engagement of Fee
Collecting Agencies, according to which the user fee collection, henceforth on all the
sections of National Highways, except BOT projects, will be undertaken on the following
modes:
(a)

Operation, Maintenance & Transfer (OMT)

(b)

By Open Competitive bids.

(c)

By engaging DGR Sponsored Agency in case of selected plazas, in

Jammu & Kashmir, North East States or disturbed areas.

In open competitive bidding mode engagement of 50% Ex-Servicemen is

mandatory to successful bidders. The procedure for engaging agency through DGR for
(c) above has been modified and made more transparent.
Procurement of user fee collection agency through open bidding is in force with
immediate effect. The bids are to be invited at Regional Office (RO) level and will be
submitted at two places, (i) NHAI HQ. Dwarka and (ii) the office of RO concerned. The
bids are to be opened in the office of RO after collecting the documents submitted at
both the places in order to ensure fair and competitive bidding. The duration of the
contract would be 1 year.

47

The following entities only are eligible for bidding:

i)

Companies registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956.

ii)

Partnership Firms registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932.

iii)

Partnership Firms registered under the Limited Liability Partnership Act,

2008.

iv)

Cooperative Societies registered under any Cooperative Societies Act (of

any state in India) or under Multi State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002.
Ex-servicemen societies registered under Cooperative Societies Act (of
any state in India) or under Mutually Added Cooperative Societies Act (of
any state in India).

The entities/ partners ( in case of partnership firm which were

removed /

debarred by NHAI based on their performance in toll collection or any other assignment
are not eligible for bidding.

4.34

The Ministry has further stated that steps taken to address problems associated

with Toll collection are as follows:

i)

To address the malfunctioning in the collection of user fee, NHAI had

request MoRT&H to permit it to engage the fee collecting agencies through

competitive bidding.
ii)

Ministry vide letter No. RW/NH-37013/03/2009/PPP dated 16.03.2010

allowed NHAI to go for competitive bidding. Accordingly, NHAI has already

called bids for engagement of fee collecting agencies through competitive
bidding for 93 toll plazas and process of opening of Financial bids are going on.
iii)

It is understood that once the successful bidders are handed over the toll

collection work, the recurrence of revenue pilferage in future will be stopped.

iv)

Ministry of Road Transport & Highways had constituted a Committee

under the

Chairmanship of

Shri Nandan

Nilekani, Chairman,

Unique

Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) and representatives of NHAI, Ministry of

Road Transport & Highways as also professional experts from IIT Delhi, to
examine all technologies available for Electronic Toll Collection and to
recommend the most suitable one for implementation throughout India. The
Committee submitted its report on 02.07.2010 which has been accepted by the
Ministry.

Electronic Toll collection (ETC) envisages use of Radio Frequency

48

Identification (RFID) technology complying to ISO 18000 6-C for use in all toll
plazas of National Highways in India. The system should meet the following
requirement with high degree of reliability:
a)

Vehicles should be uniquely identified and classified through On

Board Unit (OBU), say Tag and the Road Side Unit, say Reader,
once it passes through the toll gate;

b)

Toll should be immediately charged from the vehicle once it passes

through the toll gate by debiting the user tag-card;

c)

Different toll operators should be able to realize their respective toll

and should have access to the toll collection data;

d)

Violation in toll collection should be detected;

e)

The cost to users should be low for acceptability by road users to

achieve penetration.

4.35

The Ministry, in their latest reply, has now stated the following:
..based on the Report submitted by the expert committee headed by Shri.
Nandan Nilekani, Chairman, UIDAI, MoRTH/NHAI is in the process of
implementing Electronic Toll Collection (ETC) at toll plazas on NHs.

In

Electronic Toll Collection, by sticking Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Tags

on the windshield of the vehicles, the road users can travel seamlessly across
National Highways in India. Nationwide inter-operable Electronic Toll Collection
(ETC) is being proposed by interconnection of all toll plazas with Central
Clearing House. For implementation of Electronic Toll Collection (ETC), an Apex
Committee has been constituted by MoRTH on 08.03.2011. The TOR of the
Committee is to develop strategy, process design, operational methodology,
finalization of Standards for various components of ETC system, evolve an
institutional framework for implementation and operation of ETC.

The Apex

Committee is expected to finalise its recommendations within a period of 4

months.

4.36

The Committee have also been apprised by the Ministry about the review of Toll

Policy. The Ministry has stated that The National Highways Fee (Determination of
Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008 were notified on 5th December, 2008. After the
notification and coming into effect of the Highways Fee rules, Ministry has received
49

request/representations and suggestions regarding the tolling of two-lane highways,

discount for local users, toll levied on use of bypass and certain categories of vehicles
etc. During the discussion on the working of this Ministry held in Rajya Sabha on 28th
July, many Honble Members raised, inter alia, the afore-mentioned issues again,
including the categories left out from the list of exempted categories from levying of
user fees for use of such section of national highways, permanent project, bypass or
tunnel, four-lane of part of section of national highways under the National Highways
Fee Rules, 2008. Honble Minister as assured in the House, has directed for review of
Toll Policy. The same was undertaken in consultation with all concerned. While the
Government was considering the outcome of the review, All India Motor Transport
Congress (AIMTC) in July/August, 2010 raised certain issues, which are being further
examined.

4.37

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways added during the

evidence held on 30th March 2010:

We have taken, of course, steps to review the toll policy. The Honble Members
are aware that our Minister had given assurance on the floor of the House when
the discussion on the Toll policy in Rajya Sabha was taken up during last
session. It is being reviewed, and now under consideration of the empowered
group of Ministers headed by the Finance Minister.

4.38

The Ministry in a written reply further stated

Ministry submitted a note for amendment in the Rules for consideration in
the 3rd meeting of the Empowered Group of Ministers (EGOM) held on
10.02.2010. EGOM in its meeting decided that proposal should be first
considered by the Inter Ministerial Group (IMG). The matter was
discussed in the IMG in its meeting dated 05.03.2010. As per the
recommendation of the IMG, a note was submitted for consideration in the
fourth meeting of the EGOM held on 17.03.2010.

EGOM in its fifth

meeting held on 19.05.2010, approved the following amendments in the

National Highways Fee (Determination of rates & Collection) Rules, 2008;
a)

The threshold of capital investment is increased to Rs 2.50 crore

per km for levy of user fee on Two lane NHs. (earlier it was Rs 1.00 crore
per km)

50

b)

MPs/ MLAs, Govt Vehicles, Chairman of Legislative Councils etc

are included in the list of exempted vehicles.

c)

Bypass will be treated as part of NH section and not a structure like

Bridge/ Tunnel with user fee of Bypass section to be at the rate 1.5 times
of the prescribed rates for the section.
d)

Creation of separate category of Multi Axle Vehicle (MAV) (three

axle) with base fee of Rs 3.00 per km.

e)

Action plan for managing transition of application of National

Highways fee rules, 1997 to New Fee Rules, 2008 in respect of public
funded project is approved so the effect of change may not be more than
25% in a year including the normal increase for the year.

51

(iv)

LAND ACQUISITION POLICY

4.39

The land acquisition for development, maintenance and management or

operation of National Highways is done under Section 3 of the National Highways Act,
1956.

3(a) Notification: The process of land acquisition begins with publication of

Notification under section 3(a) of the NH Act, 1956 appointing Competent
Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA).

3(A) Notification: 3(A) Notification declares the Governments intention to

acquire land. This

Notification also empowers the Central Government to

conduct survey in the land so notified. Any person interested in the land may file
objection within 21 days of the Notification to the Competent Authority for the
land acquisition. The Competent Authority after hearing all such objections may
either allow or disallow the objections.

3(D) Notification: After finalization of the objections on publications of 3(A)

Notification. The

Competent

Authority

submits

report

to

the

Central

Government and on receipt of the report the Central Govt. publishes the 3(D)
Notification. On Notification under 3(D)all land mentioned therein shall vest with
the Central Govt. absolutely free from encumbrances.

4.40

The NH Act further provide that where land is acquired under the Act ibid, the

Competent Authority shall by an order, determine the amount to be paid as

compensation for the land. Generally, officers of local Revenue Departments are
appointed CALAs (due to their familiarity with local conditions/land-rates/land-use
patterns/ Revenue Records etc), and they normally rely on (i) local sales-statistics, (ii)
circle-rates/guideline value, or (iii) directions issued by local State Government, for
determination of compensation. The procedure for issue of Notifications is as detailed
below:
DPR Consultants are responsible for preparing LA plans. These plans are then
submitted to the field units of NHAI (PIU) for further vetting and publication. PIUs
have to verify the LA plans submitted by the DPR Consultants. The same are
then submitted to the Competent Authority for forwarding to the Central
52

Government for publication. NHAI, HQs is responsible for legal vetting of all the
Notifications of 3(a), 3A and 3D, and for submission for approval of the Honble
Minister. After approval by the Central Government, Notifications are published
in the Gazette of India and later on in the local newspapers. The process of
completion of LA activities is taking on and average about 18 months starting
from publication of 3(a) notification.

4.41

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways also added the

following during briefing:

In land acquisition, first of all, under the National Highways Act, which is used
for the acquisition of the land for the national highways, we appoint a competent
authority and the competent authority prepares notification, sends it to us, fixes
compensation, etc. The competent authority generally is the officer of the State
Government who is competent to acquire the land under the normal Land
Acquisition Act. So, the respective Additional Collectors or Deputy Collectors
are the competent authority and they do everything.

To say that the State

Governments are not involved will really be called into question because the
Deputy Collector or the Additional Collector, who is the competent authority,
prepares the notification. Consultants may have given the report but he sends
the draft notification which we approve. That determines the alignment, where
the road will pass, that kind of land will be acquired. It is he who scrutinizes
every aspect and then sends it to us.

Secondly, it is he who fixes the

compensation. We do not put any limit. It says any value which he fixes as the
market value. In the Act the word used is compensation.

4.42

When the Committee enquired about any limit given for compensation, the

Secretary stated the following during briefing:We have not imposed any limit. It is for the local officer to fix the ward and send
it.

In fact he approves the award.

We do not approve it.

If someone is

aggrieved by that, there is a provision of an arbitrator who generally is Collector

or a Commissioner of the local area. So, it is not true to say that we do not give
market value or we are doing this or that. It is left to them.

53

4.43

When asked to elaborate the provisions of arbitrator, the Secretary clarified

during the briefing:

Let me clarify it, Sir. In the National Highways Act there is a provision. You are
referring to the Land Acquisition Act 1894 under which there is no provision but
here is a provision. The competent authority passes an award. Straightaway
when an award is passed, the National Highway Authority deposits the entire
amount with him. Suppose, land owners are aggrieved that the amount is not
reasonable, they can go to the arbitrator who is either a Collector or a
Commissioner. If NHAI feel that the award is high they can also go. Under the
National Highway Act, which is the Act passed by the Parliament and under
which we acquire land for the national highway, there are adequate provisions.
We are following the present national policy on rehabilitation. We give money for
the rehabilitation of the people who are affected by the acquisition of land. So, I
would submit that under the National Highway Act and under the instructions
from the Land Acquisition Officer and NHAI we are more than fair as far as land
acquisition goes. Secondly, land acquisition for road is slightly different.

4.44

The Secretary further added:

As part of our instructions, we have appointed nodal officers in each of the
State.

These nodal officers are PWD Principal Secretaries who deal with the

Highways.

Every month they are supposed to call the consultants, project

Directors and see what is happening on ground. Therefore, from the Ministry
side we are very keen that the State Governments or the local officers are fully
involved.

While preparing the report the consultants are supposed to give

publicity to the local people so that they know that this type of a road is coming.
All these provision are there. NHAI does not approve the feasibility report or the
DPR unless it has been passed through the nodal officers appointed by the State
Government. In fact our present Minister has issued instructions that the nodal
officer should be the Chief Secretary so that he can coordinate between land,
PWD, law and order. So, some States have appointed Chief Secretaries as the
nodal officers. This is about the land acquisition.

54

4.45

The Committee wanted to know the difficulties being encountered in the extant

procedure of Land acquisition. In this regard, the Ministry submitted that delay in
acquisition of land has been one of the major problems in the execution of projects. The
main reasons for delay in the acquisition of land are as follows:
(i)

Delay in nomination of competent authority: When the land is acquired

under the National Highways Act 1956, the NHAI requests the district
administration to nominate a Revenue Officer to be appointed as the Competent
Authority under the Act. There is generally delay in the appointment of
competent authority by the State Government. Delay in nomination of the
competent authority by the State Governments invariably leads to delay in the
land acquisition process.

(ii)

Frequent transfers of CALAs: Land acquisition gets delayed due to

frequent transfers of CALA, and CALAs assign low priority to land acquisition for
NHAI (which is their secondary task).

(iii)

Institutional Capacity: Existing capacity amongst the implementing

partners is considerably weak. NHAI is dependent on the District Administration

to acquire land, an external agency over which NHAI has no control. The District
Administration has other pressing duties and is often unable to implement the
land acquisition as a priority for the project, which affects the capacity of the
implementing agency to deliver, results on time and efficiently.

(iv)

Valuation of the structures and other assets like trees on land requires

coordination with other departments and this process takes time.

(v)

Land administration and records: Outdated and inaccessible revenue

records and unclear titles of the land being acquired results in preparation of
poor land acquisition plans; this also excludes at times the legitimate rights of the
affected persons for compensation and increases litigation. The settlement of
claims during land acquisition and duplication of procedures and processes to
acquire land under the revised land acquisition plans delays the process. The
revenue records are not updated and in some cases joint verification is not done
in time, which causes delay in the process of acquisition.

55

(vi)

Time lost in arbitration: The NH Act does not provide for any time-limit

for making an application by the aggrieved party to the arbitrator.

experience has

NHAIs

been that the land owner/person interested in the land

approaches the arbitrator even after 2-3 years from the date of determination of
the award and these cases remain unsettled till that time. As a result there is
considerable loss of time in arbitration.

(vii)

Problems arising from NH Act: There is a provision in the LA Act to

provide for payment of an interest amount calculated at the rate of twelve per
cent, over and above the market value of the land for the period commencing on
and from the date of publication of the notification under sub-section (1) of
section 4 in respect of such land to the date of award of the competent authority
or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier, subject
however to the condition that in computing such period, any period or periods
during which the proceedings for the acquisition of the land were held up on
account of any stay or injunction by the order of any court shall be excluded. In
addition, a provision also exists for awarding a sum of 30% as solatium amount
over and above the market value of the land in consideration of the compulsory
nature of the acquisition. The land owner/person interested in the land whose
land is acquired under the NH Act expects to be compensated at similar rates as
provided for in the LA Act.

Accordingly, the Government has frequently

encountered resistance and agitations by affected land owners/person interested

in the land under the NH Act due to absence of provisions enabling payment of
solatium and interest. The land owner/person interested in the land whose land
is acquired under the NH Act is in a disadvantageous position as compared to
the one whose land is acquired under the LA Act.

(viii)

Delays due to changes in alignment: Sometimes the alignment of the

Highway has to be altered due to local/political pressures. It is pertinent to

mention that land acquisition once initiated have to be started all over again due
to changes in alignment.

(ix)

Delays caused by issue of incomplete Notifications (caused by

erroneous Revenue Records): Erroneous/un-updated Revenue Records

frequently lead to issue of incomplete Notifications, in that various plots required

56

to be acquired are omitted from the Notification. Consequently, the omitted plots
have to be purchased because initiation of processes for issue of Notifications
afresh causes loss of time, and also loss of money because compensation for
land is to be computed as per market-rates prevalent on date of issue of 3A
Notification.

(x)

Problems in acquisition of land from other Departments: NHAI

projects frequently require acquisition of land belonging to other Govt. Deptts.,

most notably, the Ministry of Defense. Delays/refusal by these Deptts. to transfer
their land to NHAI very often results in delay in transfer of land to
Concessionaires, leading to delay in implementation/completion of projects.
[Replies to questions raised during Briefing/Q-3/Page-3]

4.46

When asked to state the initiatives taken by the Ministry to remove the

bottlenecks in Land acquisition, the Ministry submitted the following in a written reply:

(a) Steps initiated to streamline land acquisition procedures:

Several

measures have been taken to streamline land acquisition procedures, as follows:

(i) Utilization of State Govt. machinery for land acquisition: Under the current
system of land acquisition State Govt. Revenue Department officers are
appointed as CALAs. Appointment of State Govt. Revenue Department officers
are as CALAs is advantageous to NHAI due to their familiarity with local
conditions/land-rates/land-use patterns, and because they/their Departments are
custodians of local Revenue Records on basis of which Notifications under NH
Act are issued for acquisition of land.

(ii) Strengthening CALAs infrastructure for speeding up land acquisition:

Primarily, it is the responsibility of concerned State Government to provide
adequate staff and infrastructure to CALAs.

However, as a measure for

providing assistance to CALAs for speeding up land acquisition, NHAI always

provide additional support to CALAs in the shape of additional staff/
infrastructure (i.e. vehicles/computers/fax/ photocopy machine etc). Provisions
for sanction of additional resources to CALAs are contained in Policy Circular
dated 03 Oct. 2006. NHAI HQ is more than liberal in sanctioning resources to

57

CALAs; In fact, initial installment of resources sanctioned by NHAI are mostly

more than sufficient for timely acquisition of land.
(iii) Strengthening PIUs infrastructure for land acquisition: In order to strengthen
PIU level mechanisms for expediting timely land acquisition (which primarily
comprises pursuit of land acquisition processes with CALA), aforementioned
Circular also provides for engagement of 01 retired State Govt. Revenue officer
and 01 Surveyor/Amin by each PIU for each District. In cases where PIUs need
additional manpower due to large volume of work or time constraints, additional
manpower over and above that provided for in Circular ibid is frequently
sanctioned. Recently, remuneration for personnel engaged by PIUs for land
acquisition was increased by the Executive Committee (37th Meeting on 23 Dec.
2008) to a consolidated Rs 20,000 and Rs 15,000 for Revenue Officers and
Surveyors/Amins

respectively.

Further,

provision

was

also

made

for

engagement of (i.e. non-Govt. retired) private Surveyors/Amins @ consolidated

monthly remuneration of Rs 10,000.

(iv) Interaction with the State Govts. : As brought out above, NHAI is entirely
dependent on State Govts. for obtaining possession over encumbrance free
land. Accordingly, instead of being assigned responsibilities over individual
stretches of Highway (e.g. arms of GQ, halves of NS or EW Corridors, or BOT
projects), CGMs have been assigned responsibilities for implementation of
projects in individual States. The level at which NHAI coordinates/interacts with
State Govts for problem-solving is at the level of NHAIs State CGM-State
Govts Nodal Officer for NHDP. Recently, in order to further streamline
interaction with State Govts for smooth implementation NHDP, CGMs in charge
of individual States have been posted to the respective State Capitals.

(v) Chief Secretaries as Nodal Officers: State Govts. have been requested to
nominate their Chief Secretaries as Nodal Officers for monitoring NHAI projects.
The Govts. of J&K, Punjab and Andhra Pradesh have constituted committees
under the Chief Secretaries for monitoring NHAI projects.

58

(vi) Meetings with State Chief Ministers/Chief Secretaries: Meetings have been
held with State Chief Ministers/Chief Secretaries for resolving land acquisition
and related problems/issues.

(vii) Land acquisition as performance yardstick: Progress in land acquisition has

been made the main yardstick for assessing the performance of NHAIs Project
Directors in the field.

(viii) Simplification of Procedure for issuing Notifications for acquisition of land;

Notifications for acquisition of land under Section 3 of NH Act were previously
vetted from legal angle by Ministry of Law. This contributed to delay in
issuing/publishing Notifications. Procedure for issue of such Notifications has
been simplified, and they are now issued/published after being legally vetted
internally by NHAI.

(ix) Constitution of Special Land Acquisition Units (SLAUs): In order to tide over
the problem of land acquisition getting delayed due to delay in appointment of
CALA, frequent transfers of CALA, and because CALAs assign low priority to
land acquisition for NHAI (which is their secondary task), Chairman has recently
requested Chief Secretaries of all State Govts. wherein NHDP projects are
being implemented, to constitutes dedicated Special Land Acquisition Units
(SLAUs), for acquisition of land for NHAI.

The composition proposed for Special Land Acquisition Units are as follows;
(i)

ADM/SDM

01

(ii)

Tehsildar

02

(iii)

Land Revenue Inspector or Equivalent

02

(iv) Patwari

02

(v)

06

(vi) Chainman

06

(vii) Clerk, Computer Operator

06

Surveyor/Amin

25

All the administrative and establishment charges of these units will be borne by
NHAI. The infrastructure like hiring of accommodation, vehicles, telephone

59

services etc. will be provided by NHAI. The activities of the Special Land
Acquisition Units will include the following;

(i)

Preparation of notification under section 3A.

(ii) Preparation of notification under section 3D(1)

(iii) Preparation of award
(iv) Disbursement of compensation to land owners
(v) Dispute matters relating to Arbitration cases to be referred to Arbitrator,
mutation of land acquired under the Act.

State Govts. have also been requested to consider a senior Revenue Officer
(ADM level) for deputation to NHAI to coordinate with Special Land Acquisition
Units in the State. Till date 90 SLAUs have been constituted.

(b) Steps taken to address issues such as delay in nomination of Competent

Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA), frequent transfer of CALA:-

As mentioned above, in order to tide over the problem of land acquisition getting
delayed due to delay in appointment of CALA, frequent transfers of CALA, and
because CALAs assign low priority to land acquisition for NHAI (which is their
secondary task), Chairman has recently requested Chief Secretaries of all State
Govts wherein NHDP projects are being implemented, to constitutes dedicated
Special Land Acquisition Units (SLAUs), for acquisition of land for NHAI

(c) Steps taken to address issues such as time lost in arbitration:-

A proposal has been submitted by NHAI for making amendments to the NH Act for
provision of timeframes for initiation/completion of Arbitration.

4.47

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways also added:

Further, to see that the land acquisition is expedited we have asked the NHAI to
set up 150 land acquisition units all over the country. Our present Minister has
personally reviewed the land acquisition matter with most of the Chief Ministers
and I am happy to say that the Chief Ministers have assured all assistance in the
land acquisition.. I must say that the road construction is slow in the
60

States where land acquisition is not taking place.

The hon. Members can

themselves appreciate the progress in the Western and Southern parts of the
country. Progress in UP, Bihar, Assam and West Bengal is poor. We do not
hesitate to accept it and the main reason is land acquisition. I have gone to
Assam four or five times.

The present Chief Secretary is of course taking

interest but six packages are in North-Cachar district. Right up to the Cabinet
Secretary, everybody is making attempt but still condition on the ground have not
improved and the contractors have run away. They do not want to do the work
unless there is basic assurance about the law and order. So, the position is,
unless the State Government cooperate with regard to land acquisition, providing
protection to the contractors and with regard to collection toll, things cannot
move. For example, State like Orissa, Goa are not cooperating in toll collection.
The result will be the NHAI will be left with no alternative but either to abandon
the programme or to continue in a slow manner

4.48

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways further added the

following during the evidence:

..in the past, the condition which was there in the concession
agreements was that on the appointed date 50 per cent of the land should be
available with NHAI to be handed over to the concessionaire. Clealy, it was
inadequate. This is one of the main reasons, which lead to delays in execution of
those projects. The present provision, which has been provided, is that there
should be at least 80 per cent availability of land on the appointed date. In that
context, this is now being sought to be very scrupulously followed. So, when a
case comes up for final approval, first at the PPPAC stage and then at the stage
of the Cabinet Committee on Infrastructure itself we are seeking to ensure that at
least 70-75 per cent land is available for the project so that by the appointed date
80 per cent would be available. If not, at least, notification under section 3 (d)
should have been done for at least 75 per cent of the land.

4.49

The Committee are also informed by the Ministry about the proposals to amend

current Land acquisition policy. The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, in a
written reply, has submitted that measures to compress the timeline of completion of
land acquisition have been conceptualized/proposed, which are as follows:

61

(i)

Preparation of accurate Land Acquisition Plan by the DPR Consultant; In

order to facilitate preparation of accurate and correct Land Acquisition Plans by

DPR Consultants, it is proposed to establish PIUs for the stretches for which
DPRs are being prepared. Primarily, these PIUs shall liaison with local
authorities and the DPR Consultants personnel for facilitating preparation of
accurate and correct Land Acquisition Plans.

(ii)

The ROW of the proposed should be demarcated by boundary-stones,

and its centre-line should also be marked by such boundary-stones so as to

eliminate the scope for holdups arising out of unclear/incorrect Land Acquisition
Plans. TOR of contracts for preparation of DPRs ought to be revised to this
effect.

(iii)

Amendment to the NH Act: Various difficulties are being faced in

acquisition of land for NHDP and payment of compensation thereof under NH

Act, 1956. Some of these difficulties have arisen due to differences between NH
Act 1956 and Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It is therefore felt that certain
amendments are necessary to NH Act 1956 in order to facilitate smoother
acquisition of land. A proposal has accordingly been submitted for making
amendments to the NH Act for facilitating following issues:

(a) Return of surplus land to landowners.

(b) Payment of compensation as per provisions of LA Act, 1894.
(c) Provision of timeframes for declaration Award by CALA/disbursement
of compensation, and for initiation/completion of Arbitration.

4.50

During evidence, the Committee, express concern over the land acquisition

status in States like Kerala and Goa, where the highways projects have been severely
affected because of the problems associated with land acquisition. It was pointed out
that in these States, several stretches of NH are hemmed in by dense population of
homes and commercial structures. The huge numbers of residential and commercial
structures along these highways are under fear of demolition in view of Highways
projects.

62

4.51

In respect of Goa, where NH-17 & NH-4A were facing the Land acquisition

problems and people were asking for 45 metre Road instead of 60 metre standard four
lane Road, the representative of Ministry of Road Transport and Highways/NHAI stated:
About the NH-17 Project, I would submit that we have already decided to restrict
the land acquisition to 45 metres. About NH-4A, we have received some
representations from the State and the local people. We are in the process of
taking a decision in that matter also.

4.52

When inquired about the land acquisition problems in Kerala, where vast

stretches of National Highways are dotted with houses and shops that are the only
source of livelihood of people, Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways
responded by saying:
Unfortunately, in Kerala, Sir, but the problems are very very complex.

As

hon. Member is saying, all along the National Highways people are living

the
and

the National Highways are narrow. If you want to widen them we have to uproot
those people. It is a big problem. That has to be solved by all of us with a human
angle in mind. If the road has to be built, land has to be given. This is precisely
the reason why in Kerala award has been very slow. In fact, we were about to
drop this North-South corridor. In 2007 there was a stalemate. The Kerala
Cabinet agreed to give 45 metres. We wanted 60 metres. They were first not
prepared to give anything beyond 30 metres. The

Cabinet took the decision.

We said we would suspend the project and we did. Then the Kerala Cabinet
decided to give 45 metres and the work moved. Even if this 45 metres is not
given, there is no alternative for the NHAI but to terminate the project
irrespective of the consequences. This is the view of the Ministry and the
Minister has made it abundantly clear.

4.53

The Ministry, in their written reply, has further stated:

.Though there was agitation against land acquisition in the State of
Kerala, consensus have been arrived to develop National Highways with 45 m
width during the all party meeting held in the month of December 2010 under the
chairmanship of the Chief Minister of Kerala. However, the State Government

63

has decided to with hold the land acquisition action till the assembly elections to
be held in April 2011. During the meeting with the State Government officials it
has also been agreed in principle to consider minor changes in the alignments,
wherever possible, to ensure minimum demolition of residential and commercial
structures.
In the State of Goa all the demands raised by public, institutions and State
Government have been taken into consideration and only bare minimum
demolition is involved.

While planning re-alignment in such areas, local

administration/public has been actively involved.

4.54

Secretary, also added as under:

Sir, in States like Kerala, the ideal solution is to have Expressways. You avoid
these existing roads altogether and take a new alignment avoiding all human
habitations. They should be absolutely green field projects. That is the answer.
That is what we should do. But that will cost huge amount of money.

4.55

When asked to explain reasons as to why for the four-lanning of road, land has

been acquired from only one side, the representative of Ministry of Road Transport &
Highways commented the following during evidence:
Sir, there are two ways that a four-lane road can be constructed. One way is the
two-lane road is already existing; you make another by the side of it leaving
some gap for the median which is 4.5 metres. This is one way which is called
eccentric widening. From the centreline it is eccentric. The second way is
concentric widening. There is a seven metre road and then add on both sides.
These are the two ways. If we do the concentric widening what happens is this.
Then, four-and-a-half metres of the existing road will be rendered useless
because at that portion the median will come. The divider will come at four-anda-half metres. Even if we put the dividers last, the road is already existing and
that will be rendered useless because that will come within the median. It is
preferred to have a new road so that we can utilise the existing one. The other
advantage is that if we are concentric widening, at least there is one road on
which the traffic moves during construction. If you start doing this and then you

64

also construct the median then there is some problem of traffic diversion. Even
that can be managed. But then it is a cleaner arrangement to have a new one.

4.56

The representative of Ministry also stated:

As per the urban development rules being followed by the State
Government, there is no construction zone in 40 metres from the central line on
either side. From 40 metres to 75 metres, there is a 35-metre band on either side
where very restricted construction like godowns and agricultural sheds are
allowed. But, unfortunately, in our country, urban development is taking place
rapidly and there is no proper enforcement by the State agencies on the urban
development activities which ultimately results in the restriction of land
acquisition. Now, traffic is growing at 12-13 per cent every year. It will
necessitate further widening of roads. As you know, for the GQ, we converted it
into four-lane. By the time we completed the four-laning, it has required further
widening into six-laning. So, this is a major issue upon which a lot of deliberation
is required.

4.57

When asked to comment on the complaints of inadequate compensation,

Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways stated during the evidence:
........If the State Government authority and the land owner or the shop owner or
house owner, they amicably settle and come out with a package, we are
approving it. In some cases if the land acquisition officer is not doing, it is entirely
the job of the arbitrator who is provided in the Act. Who is the arbitrator? It is the
Collector. If the Collector says that this is an amicable settlement, it is okay. Let
me give an example. In Baghpat district, Ghaziabad, NOIDA etc. the Collectors
fixed some price. It was around end of 2008. But the landlords did not agree.
Then the Commissioners intervened and finally they have fixed an amount which
is very high. We said okay, whatever you say we will accept. As far as the
Central Government is concerned and the National Highway Act is concerned,
there is no impediment. It is entirely for the State Government to fix the price and
come out with a package.

65

(V)

DELAYED PROJECTS

4.58

The Ministry of Road Transport & Highways furnished detailed list of awarded

NHDP Projects (Underimplementation), Golden Quadrilateral Projects and North SouthEast West Corridor Projects (Fully completed as well as Underimplementation). These
lists are given at Annexure IV, V, VI & VII. These lists/statement shows that almost all
works of highway projects had been delayed or were likely to be delayed.

The

Committee also noted that in several cases, duration of these delays as well as
corresponding cost escalations are substantial.

4.59

According to the Ministry, the major reasons for delays in implementation of

NHDP are as follows:

Land Acquisition:
There has been inordinate delay in acquisition of land in some States mostly due
to procedural formalities, court cases and low level cooperation from the State
Government Officials. There have been delays in disbursement of compensation
by the Competent Authority to the affected land owners, although NHAI deposits
the compensation amount determined by the competent authority well in
advance.The procedure of Land Acquisition has now been simplified. Earlier all
the notification under NH Act were vetted by the Ministry of Law. Recently, an
amendment has been made to the allocation of business rules by which these
notifications are not required to be sent to the Ministry of Law. The Ministry of
Law has approved the standard formats of various notifications keeping in view
the similar nature of the notifications of Land Acquisition.
Environment and Forest clearances
There have been considerable delays in getting the forest clearance.Besides the
conditions stipulated by the Central Government (MOEF) in the first stage
clearance (in-principle approval), the State forest departments impose additional
conditions which are, at times, unreasonable and difficult to meet. Demands
have been made for staff quarters, wireless systems, vehicles etc. without
apparent justification. The demand for compensatory afforestation also varies
greatly from state to state from two times to as much as twelve times. The
Government of U.P. imposes an additional condition for providing a dedicated
66

strip of 10 m for plantation of all along the highway. Such a condition is very
difficult to meet and creates problems in the implementation of works. The Net
Present Value (NPV) of the diverted forest land is demanded even for the road
side lands belonging to PWD/NHAI (notified as protected forest for management
purposes).

Demand of NPV alone will have a financial implication of about

`1100 crores for the North-South and East-West Corridor taking the lowest NPV
rate of `5.80 lakhs per ha. In a few projects widening involves diversion of small
strip of land in the wildlife areas (National Part/sanctuary). The application for
forest clearance in such cases is to be first submitted to the National Board of
Wildlife. Approval of the Board is required at various states, including the very
first step of undertaking survey and investigation for preparation of Detailed
Project Report. The process of approval at each stage takes a long time as the
Board meets only once in three months. Moreover, there remains an uncertainty
with regard to whether the projects on such alignments would receive final
approval. Environmental clearance is required even for a highway widening
projects involving land acquisition of more than 20 m put together on either side;
and for a new alignments exceeding `100 crore in cost, even though the
alignment may not be falling in an eco-sensitive area. As a result, projects are
delayed and progress of the works is affected.

Obtaining these clearances

involves coordination with various State forest department, MOEF, and State
Pollution Control Boards.
Clearance of Railways for ROB designs
Under NHDP Phases-I&II and other projects about 229 (84 on GQ alone) Rail
Over Bridges (ROB)/ Rail Under Bridges (RUB) have to be constructed.
Approvals have

to be obtained from Railways for the following:

(i) General Agreement Drawing (GAD) submitted by NHAI.

(ii) Permission of the Commissioner of Railway Safety (CRS) for shifting
of level crossing.
(iii) Approval of detailed designs and drawings of sub structures and super
structures submitted by NHAI after proof checking by consultants.
(iv) Approval of drawings for temporary arrangement.
(v) CRS sanction for super structures.
67

Obtaining

the

above

clearances/approval

from

the

Railways

involves

coordination with several departments within Railways and it takes a long time
to get the

necessary approvals. Also, in the packages where ROBs are being

constructed by

the

Railways

themselves,

progress

has

not

been

satisfactory. An officer of Ministry of Railways has since been appointed on

deputation basis for coordinating with the Railway Department.
Shifting of Utilities
Utilities of different types e.g. electric lines, water pipelines, sewer lines,
telecommunication lines have to be relocated with the assistance of concerned
utilities owning agencies. Shifting of utilities, especially water-pipelines, takes
considerable time. Moreover, relocation of utilities can only be taken up after
acquisition of land.
Local Law and Order Problems
In many States works have been affected because of adverse Law and Order
conditions and activities of anti-social groups. Law and Order is a serious issue
in the State of Assam. Stoppage of work by the local population demanding
additional underpasses/bypasses, flyover etc. is also frequent.
Poor Performance by Some Contractors
Performance of some of the contractors has been very poor. Cash flow problems
have been one of the major reasons for poor performance. Termination of such
contracts often results in long drawn litigation and further delays in the works.

4.60

When the Committee enquired about the procedural delays and asked the

Ministry to comment on the reports that there was a time lag of three years between a
project being sanctioned and the work starting on it, the Ministry, in a written reply,
stated the following:
Once the projects are approved by the Government, NHAI is required to
complete Detailed Project Report/Feasibility Report of the project by appointing
a Consultant. The process of appointment of Consultants usually takes four to
six months time and the Detailed Project Report requires another 1 to 1 1/2
year time depending upon the project length and number of structures
involved. After finalization of cost through DPR, the project is awarded for

68

procurement of contractor. As approved by the cabinet during May06 the

water fall mechanism is to be

considered for award of projects i.e. first, the

project is to be procured on BOT basis, if it is not successful, then the project

is to be procured on BOT (Annuity) basis; in case both the above mechanisms
fail, then the project is considered for procurement on EPC basis. Recently,
NHAI received single bid/no bid for number of projects which are financially
less viable/non-viable. It was therefore, decided that the process of award of
contracts in these projects may be initiated afresh, after re-structuring of the
project. If the project, still does not receive the proper response from the bidder
on BOT, the projects are again to be invited on annuity basis. There is a
definite time frame for invitation of bid which cannot be compromised and
therefore some times there is a delay in procurement for some of the projects.
Considering these procedural delays now there is a proposal under process for
approval of the Government that the projects after preparation of DPR will be
decided in the first instance itself, whether it is to be considered for
procurement on BOT /BOT (Annuity) or EPC. A proposal is also under
consideration of the B K Chaturvedi Committee for exemption to NHAI from
obtaining PPPAC clearance for its projects.

4.61

Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways also, during the evidence held

on 30.3.2010, added as under:

If you take the blacktopping of the road, you would have noticed that today the
NHAI is operating with automatic pavers.. So, in order to maintain the quality
of standard and in order to achieve the speed of construction, it was done like
that. Previously, we were constructing roads where there were delays; the
delays are before you. We have taken 4-6 years to construct roads; but the fact
remains that once we switched to the BOT project, the two cannot be confused
the delays which occurred in the EPC type of projects have not occurred in the
BOT projects. The BOT projects were by and large finished in time. In the case
of the BOT project, the cost is irrelevant because the Government does not pay
for the cost. If that man goes over-budget, it is between him and the bankers
who are giving him the loans. So, the two projects were not on the same footing
at all.

69

4.62

The Committee wanted to know about the status of NHDP Phase III A, which

was earlier scheduled to be completed by December 2009. In this regard, the Ministry
of Road Transport & Highways informed the Committee as follows:
Government of India approved 4/6 laning of 4000 km of NH under NHDP
Phase-IIIA on BOT basis at an estimated cost of `22,000.00 crores (at 2004
prices) on 05.03.2005. Against the 4000 km, Ministry identified 80 projects of
total length of 6139 km scheduled for completion by December 2009. So far 41
projects of length 2755 km have been, awarded under NHDP Phase-IIIA. Bids
for another 3 projects have been received and are under process. During 200708 NHAI initiated bidding for 44 projects under NHDP-III. The economic slow
down in 2008 affected the bidding of these projects which resulted in little or no
response to the bidding. Most of the projects remaining to be awarded are
commercially non-viable on BOT (Toll) for 4-laning. The projects are being restructured to reduce the cost consistent with road safety to make them viable.
These projects are proposed for bidding during the current year. Upto
September 2009 the total length completed under NHDP-IIIA is 982 km.
The Committee was subsequently informed by the Ministry that likely date
of completion of project has been revised to December, 2013.

4.63

In the background material furnished to the Committee, Ministry had stated that

Phase-IV, VI and VII have been approved in the month of July 2008, November 2006 &
December 2007 respectively. In spite of that NIL progress (as Length completed) has
been indicated in their status as on 31 August 2009. When asked about the reason for
the same, the Ministry responded the following in a written communication:
NHDP Phase IV, VI and VII are targeted for completion by December, 2015,
December, 2015 and December, 2014 respectively. Presently feasibility studies
are being prepared for most of the projects under above mentioned NHDP
Phases. After completion of feasibility studies process of land acquisition will be
initiated followed by bidding process for award of concession and financial
closer. Generally, highway projects have a gestation period of 4-5 years
(including the DPR phase). Hence, if physical progress be achieved in the initial
phase of construction, the completion of actual length will be achieved towards
the end of the target date of completion of project.
70

4.64

Responding to a query from the Committee about the steps taken by the Ministry

of Road Transport & Highways to expedite the projects, the Ministry stated the
following:
(a)

The Contracts are regularly monitored at various levels such as by

Supervision Consultant, Project Directors, Senior officers of NHAI. Progress

reviews are also held at the level of Chairman, NHAI, Secretary, Department of
Road Transport & Highways and Minister, Shipping Road Transport & Highways.
(b)

State Governments have appointed Senior officers as nodal officers for

resolving problems associated with implementation of the NHDP such as land

acquisition, removal of utilities, forest/ pollution /environment clearance etc.
These nodal officers hold periodic meetings to review the projects and take
action to resolve the problems.
(c)

A Committee of Secretaries has been constituted Cabinet Secretary to

address inter-ministerial and Centre State issues such as land acquisition,

utility shifting, environment approvals, clearance of ROBs.
(d)

The procedure of issue of Land Acquisition notifications has now been

simplified. Earlier all the notification under NH Act were vetted by the Ministry of
Law. Recently, an amendment has been made in the Allocation of Business
Rules by which these notifications are not required to be sent to the Ministry of
Law. The Ministry of Law has approved the standard formats of various
notifications keeping in view the similar nature of the notifications of Land
Acquisition.
(e)

To expedite the construction of ROBs an officer of the Railways has been

posted to NHAI to coordinate the Ministry of Railways. MOU has also been
signed with M/s. IRCON for construction of some of the ROBs.
(f)

Action has been taken against non performing contractors and they are

not allowed to bid for future projects unless they improve the performance in
existing contracts.
(g)

Steps have been taken to improve cash flow problems of contractors by

granting interest bearing discretionary advance at the request of contractor,

release of retention money against bank guarantee of equal amount, deferment
71

of recovery of advances (on interest basis) and relaxation in minimum IPC

amount.
(h)

NHAI has recently opened Regional Offices at 10 locations each headed

by a Chief General Manager for decentralization of decision making for

expeditious implementation of projects.

4.65

The Ministry, in a written reply, further submitted:

NHAI has formulated a revised strategy for implementation of projects. As per
this strategy, 10 Regional Offices1 headed by Chief General Manager (CGM)
have been opened. The Chief General Managers have been delegated financial
as well as administrative powers for execution of works. Further co-ordination
between various state level agencies has also been assigned to the Regional
Office. For land acquisition, special land acquisition cell has been created in HQ
and special land acquisition units involving the State level Officers, who are
well-conversant with land acquisition process, have been engaged for
expeditious completion of land acquisition2. Special training is also being
imparted to these officers.

4.66 Annual Report (2009-2010) of Ministry of Road Transport and Highways

comprehensively elaborate the Revised Strategy for Implementation of National
Highways Development Project (NHDP), which is as follows:

A new direction has been given to expedite the implementation of the National
Highways Development Project (NHDP) with the objective to achieve construction of 20
km road per day. The issues of critical concern to various stakeholders in regard to
policy framework and planning and implementation have been addressed. The Ministry
has targeted the procedural issues, acting as roadblocks and major bottlenecks in
achieving the desired progress of the Infrastructure. A Committee under Shri B.K.
Chaturvedi, Member, Planning Commission was constituted to recommend framework
and strategy to resolve procedural impediments to the programme objective as well as
to take a holistic look at the financing need and arrive at a financing plan that balances
the needs of the road sector and other priority areas of the Government. The
recommendations of the Committee for expeditious implementation of the NHDP have
1
2

As per Economic Survey (2010-11), 14 Regional Offices have been set up as on date.
192 Special Land Acquisition Units have been set up in various States.

72

been approved by the Government. The main features of the revised policy framework
are:
(i)

An Inter-Ministerial Group (IMG) has been set up under the Chairmanship

of Secretary, MORTH with representatives of DEA, Department of Expenditure,

Planning Commission and Ministry of Law and Justice to consider issues relating
to MCA. Where there is unanimity in the decision, the same will be then put up to
the Minister, Road Transport & Highways for approval. Where there is no
unanimity in the decision, the matter will be placed before the Empowered Group
of Ministers (EGoM) comprising the Finance Minister, Minister of Road Transport
& Highways and Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission. The EGoM will also
consider and take decision on all issues where there is no unanimity in
committees at the level of officers and which do not require approval of the
Cabinet/ Cabinet Committee on Infrastructure (CCI).

(ii)

Carrying out implementation of road projects on all the three modes of

delivery viz. BOT (Toll), BOT (Annuity) and EPC (Item Rate Contract)
concurrently rather than sequentially. Roads below a certain threshold in terms
of traffic do not merit testing on BOT (Toll) as the process only leads to delays in
implementation and award. Hence, a road not found prima facie suitable for BOT
(Toll) can be implemented directly on BOT (Annuity) subject to the overall cap as
envisaged in the Work Plan. The decision of shifting a project from BOT (Toll) to
BOT (Annuity) would be taken by the IMG chaired by Secretary, MORTH and
approved by Minister, Road Transport & Highways.

(iii)

Before implementing a project on EPC basis, it will be compulsorily

tested for BOT (Annuity) and only if unacceptable bids are received then only the
project will be awarded on EPC basis. Normally, an Annuity bid working out to an
Equity IRR of up to 18% will be acceptable as per these norms. However, in the
event of bids exceeding the Equity IRR of 18 %, the same will be bid out on
EPC. In case of difficult areas having law & order problems, security,
inhospitable terrain etc, a bid working out to an Equity IRR of up to 21% will be
acceptable considering the risk premium of 3 %, on case to case basis. PPPAC
will be empowered to give approval for projects to be moved from Annuity to
EPC where acceptable bids have not been received.

73

(iv)

Raising of overall VGF cap of 5% to 10% for the entire six-laning

programme, and consideration of individual projects in low traffic GQ stretches

with VGF up to 20% within an overall cap of 500 Km out of the 5080 Km of the
Phase-V programme yet to be awarded.

(v)

Necessary changes in the Model Documents, the Request for

Qualification (RFQ), Request for Proposal (RFP) and the Model Concession
Agreements (MCA) have been carried out in accordance with the approved
recommendations of the B.K. Chaturvedi Committee for bids being invited for
various projects.

(vi)

Funding of the NHDP Projects under SARDP-NE and in Jammu &

Kashmir with Additional Budgetary Support (ABS) over and above the cess that
the Government provides to NHAI on a yearly basis.

Apart from it, a Joint Task Force of Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) and
the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has also been constituted to serve as an
institutionalized framework for a constant Industry Government dialogue and
interaction on the issues related to the development of National Highways under the
Chairmanship of the Secretary (RT&H). The support of State Governments has been
institutionalized with the signing of State Support Agreement (SSA) by 19 States so far.
Other States have also been requested to expedite the signing of the Agreement. Chief
Ministers of all the States have been requested to set up High Level Coordination
Committees under Chief Secretaries to sort out issues involving coordination with
various Departments.

4.67

When asked about any professional study conducted by the Ministry of Road

Transport & Highways on the delayed projects, the Ministry responded that projects
implemented by NHAI are regularly reviewed in the ministry at highest level and NHAI
is advised to take actions as per provisions of contract where the projects are delayed.

4.68

Concerned with the requirement to strengthen the instrument and mechanism of

supervision available with the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways; more so, since
presently most of the highways projects are carried out on BOT model, the Committee

74

asked the Ministry to state the steps (other than the opening of 10 regional offices)
being taken by them. The Ministry responded:
NHAI appoints independent/supervision consultants who monitor the progress
of projects. Further, the projects are also monitored on daily basis by the project
directors posted in the field offices. Measures have been initiated to provide
adequate staff to the Regional Offices which will enhance the capacity of
regional offices to closely monitor the implementation of projects. Apart from
these measures projects are also monitored regularly at the Head Quarter with
routine/regular reviews of targets/milestones fixed.

75

(vi)

NON-PERFORMING CONTRACTORS

4.69

Non-performing contractors are one of the major reasons for the inordinate

delays of highway projects as acknowledged by the Secretary, Ministry of Road

Transport & Highways during the briefing. The Committee enquired that since almost
95% of the NHDP projects have gone past the target time of completion, whether any
review of the performances of contractors had been done. The Ministry responded as
under:
The projects were delayed due to different reasons i.e. non-acquisition of land,
delay in shifting of utilities, delay in clearance from forest/environment, delay
due to non approval of ROBs by Railways etc. The delay on account of
reasons stated cannot be attributed to the contractor and therefore the
extension of time was considered by the Competent Authority. However there
were some of the projects, which were delayed due to non-performance of the
contractor in spite of all the clearances and handing over of encumbrance free
site to the contractor. These contracts were terminated and the work was reawarded.
The details of the projects which were terminated and re-awarded is
enclosed as Annexure VIII.

4.70

About monitoring of contractors, the Ministry further informed in a written

communication as follows:
The performance of contractor is constantly reviewed while reviewing the
progress of projects and if consistent poor performance is observed the
contractor is placed in the list of non performing contractors. In some cases due
to lack of progress the contracts have been terminated. Contractors placed in the
list of non-performing contractors are barred from bidding for NHAI projects. In
order to expedite the process of award certain changes have been made in the
documentation and process of award consequent to the acceptance of Shri B. K.
Chaturvedi Committee Report by the Government.

4.71

The C&AG Report, submitted to Parliament in 2008 had categorically mentioned

that project irregularities in the highways project are expected to cost the Government

76

revenue about ` 384 crore from projects. In this regard, Ministry of Road Transport &
Highways stated that regarding project irregularities in the Highways Projects, the
C&AG in its Audit Report No. PA 16 of 2008 UG (Commercial) have pointed out
revenue loss of ` 384 crores in following projects:
Para No. Name of the Project Observations
of
the
Report
2.3
DelhiGurgaon The concession period
Project
should have been fixed as
14 years instead of 20
years
2.3
Jaipur-Kishangarh
The concession period
Project
should have been fixed as
12 years instead of 20
years
4.2.1
Satara-Kagal project Penalty for delay in
completion of project

Amount
` Crores
121.63

187.77

2.11

4.2.1
4.2.2

Panagarh-Palsit
- DO 8.75
Satara-Kagal project Penalty
for
non 1.89
completion of punch list

4.2.3

Jaipur-Kishangarh
Project

Penalty for non achieving 3.77

mile stones

4.2.3

Satara-Kagal
Project
TambaramTindivanam,
Tuni
Anakapalli,
Palsit
dankuni, Panagarh
Palsit
TambaramTindivanam,
Tuni
Anakapalli,
Palsit
Dankuni

-DO-

4.5.1

4.5.2

12.05

Delay in Commencement 23.89

of toll collection

Non fixation of toll rate as 22.73

per latest WPI

384.59
Actions taken Note of the C&AG report have already been submitted to Ministry
on 20.05.2009 which has been forwarded by Ministry to C&AG for their vetting.

77

4.72

When asked to state whether any punitive measure had been taken against

these non-performing/errant contractors, the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways

stated the following:
The punitive action against non-performing contractors were taken by NHAI
vide policy Circular 40/2004, Technical dated 10.08.04 (enclosed at Annexure
IX ) vide which it was declared that these contractors are not to be pre-qualified
for award of any future projects in NHAI until such time their performance
improves. Also the contracts of contractors who were non-performers even
after periodical reviews were terminated and the bank guarantee for
performance security was en-cashed. Also, the machinery and material lying
on the project sites was confiscated and utilized by the new contractor. The
balance works are being executed with the limited liability / risk and cost of the
terminated contractor.

4.73

The Ministry further elaborated that in all cases of terminated contracts, the

Bank Guarantee for performance security is en-cashed and materials on the project site
are confiscated and utilized by new contractors.

4.74

When the Committee enquired whether there is any provision for financial

penalty in case of non-performing contractors, the Ministry in a written reply stated:

As per existing policy there is no particular clause for imposing a financial
penalty on the non-performing/black listed contractors. The penalty may be
imposed as per the contract agreement for a particular work. However, as per
policy followed by NHAI, non-performing contractors are not pre-qualified for
award of any future contract in NHAI until such time their performance improves
in course of subsequent periodic reviews.

4.75

Asked to comment on a report, according to which Highway contractors and

developers have been barred from bidding for new projects if they did not achieve
financial closure for three or more projects they were working on, the Ministry submitted
the following in a written reply:

78

The Authority has felt that many new entrants in the road sector do not have
the necessary resources to successfully manage execution of road projects and
hence would be exposing itself to project risk if suitable remedial measures are
not provided for. One of the most effective methods to assess the developers
level of comfort would be the lenders response to project financing. Hence a
criteria linked to this has been recently approved by the Authority as per which
for projects of total project cost (TPC) less than `3000 crore, a developer
should not have more than 3 outstanding projects pending for financial close and
for projects of TPC more than `3000 crores not more than 2 outstanding
financial close, and, both put together not more than 3 outstanding financial
close. With the same intent, certain restrictions have been placed with regard to
selection of EPC contractors by the developers, minimum net worth requirement
linked to project size, restrictions on non-performers from seeking prequalifications etc.

4.76

Providing an overview of the steps taken to expedite the progress of NHDP, the

Economic Survery document for the year 2010-11, stated as under:

..regular monitoring of contracts and progress reviews, appointment of senior
officials by State Governments as nodal officers for resolving problems
associated with implementation of the NHDP, setting up of a Committee of
Secretaries under the Cabinet Secretary to address interministerial and CentreState issues such as land acquisition, utility shifting, environment approvals and
clearances of railway over-bridges (ROBs), simplification of the procedure of
issue of land acquisition (LA) notifications, and posting of a Railways officer to
the (NHAI) to coordinate with the Ministry of Railways in expediting the
construction of ROBs. The NHAI has also set up Regional Offices headed by
Chief General Managers for close monitoring of projects. So far 14 Regional
Offices have been set up.

79

(vii) MAINTENANCE

4.77

According to the written replies of the Ministry, the maintenance of National

Highways is of paramount importance for an state-of-the-art, efficient as well as

functional network of National Highways. National Highways Authority of India (NHAI)
has been mandated to carry out development of civil works on entrusted NHDP/NonNHDP stretches. Such stretches are required to be maintained prior to award of civil
contracts by NHAI. After completion of construction, contractors/concessionaires are
required to maintain the stretches during the construction/concession period and O&M
contractors/OMT Concessionaires after the contract/concession period. Since, prior to
entrustment of National Highway stretches, MoRT&H is solely responsible for
maintenance & repair of these stretches, the same is being carried out through State
PWDs and MoRT&H releases the funds for this purpose. In similar lines, prior to award
of civil works for development, NHAI is carrying out the maintenance & repair works
through State PWDs from the fund allocated/released by MoRT&H out of its overall
allocation under maintenance & repair head.

4.78

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways further added the

following during briefing:

Now, most of the roads are under PPP.. Concessionaire is required to
maintain the road for the whole period of concession which varies from 12 to it
goes up to 30 years. That is the case with regard to the PPP roads and that is
why there is a great advantage in road construction of PPP programme from that
angle.

But the roads which are constructed under the EPC or under the

traditional construction contracts,DLP (defect liability period) is one year.

So, any defect within one year, he would rectify and thereafter, he will not. But
at the same time, in certain projects, we put longer period for maintenance
where the defect liability period is restricted to one year from the date of
completion of the contract.

4.79

On a query from the Committee about official mechanism available with the

Ministry or NHAI for the maintenance of national highways in different parts of the
country, particularly in the wake of complaints regarding the dilapidated condition of

80

several stretches of national highway, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, in
a written statement, submitted as under:
Wherever 4/6 laning works under NHDP are under implementation, to keep the
existing roads in traffic worthy condition, the maintenance of existing roads are
carried out by the Contractor/Concessionaire as part of their obligations under
contract/concession agreement. In case of sections entrusted to NHAI where
4/6 laning have not yet started, the maintenance of existing roads are being
carried out by NHAI directly or through State PWDs with funds provided by
NHAI. After completion of 4/6 laning works, comprehensive maintenance are
regularly carried out. For projects constructed by NHAI on EPC basis i.e. through
budgetary sources, the maintenance of completed highways is carried out by
engaging Operation and Maintenance contractors selected through competitive
bidding. Under this, apart from routine and periodic operation and maintenance
of highways, engineering improvement as required for better road safety are also
taken up as and when necessary.

For BOT projects, the responsibility for

maintenance is with the concessionaire.

4.80

The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways further added as under:

The scope of work O&M contracts broadly includes routine maintenance, road

property management, incident management, engineering improvement and incident

management. The various activities undertaken under these aspects are as under:

Routine Maintenance
Pothole treatment-timely repair to prevent further damage
Crack sealing - to prevent pothole occurrence
Median plantation - to improve the highway ambience
Shoulder/slope maintenance-to protect the highway from weather
effects
Cleaning of drains etc-to ensure efficient drainage

Road Property Management

Repair of damaged road signs-Timely repair to ensure road safety
Road markings-to ensure night and bad weather visibility

81

Crash barriers to prevent accident and mitigate its impact

Median railings-to ensure safety of pedestrians
Kerb maintenance to prevent unauthorized median cuts and enhance
road safety

Engineering improvement
Service-road- to segregate slow traffic from fast traffic for safe and fast
movement

on the highway

Junction improvement-to reduce the traffic conflict on the highway

Truck/Bus lay byes-to prevent unauthorized parking on highway
New Road furniture-to enhance road safety
New drains to improve drainage system

Incident Management
Route patrolling-to watch and ward highway assets and help road user
Tow away crane to tow away broken down vehicle from the carriage way
Ambulance service- to briskly provide first aid to accident victim and carry
him to nearest hospital, if required.

4.81

On this issue, the Chairman, National Highways Authority of India further

elaborated during briefing as under:

We asked the private companies to come in and operate what is called on OMT
type of concession. They operate, they toll and they do the maintenance. So, it
becomes maintenance free. What is not commonly appreciated... is
the fact that in the life cycle cost of a road the initial cost is about only 20 per
cent. If we say that we are budgeting for `3,30,000 crore over the entire cycle of
NHDP as the initial cost of building the road, the full cost of maintenance would
be four times that amount. So, it will come to more that `13,00,000 crore which
will have to be spent on maintenance. Since these sort of figures cannot be
provided for out of the Government Budget in the foreseeable future, hence
tolling of the roads is perhaps inevitable so that we can generate enough funds
to do the maintenance otherwise these complaints.that maintenance is not
adequate will multiply.

82

4.82

The Chairman, National Highways Authority of India further added:

The hon. Member might appreciate that maintenance of a road is very
different from that of a maintenance of a house where you have to just a bit of
painting and little re-wiring. But here the road is subjected to a dynamic load.
Underneath the asphalt which you are seeing, there is an entire layer of heavy
stones which is the rock aggregate and the major load is taken by those stones
which you are not seeing. They are very thick layers. Below that there have to
be supporting layers of soil. Over the years as stresses keep up building up on
the loading of the road, these layers get disturbed and as hon. Members are
themselves aware, when we have taken over the old roads we have had to
reconstruct them from the base. I mean there is no question of maintenance of
the old roads, you have to start right from the bottom and you have to ensure
that proper drainage is provided. At many places we have to put in Geotextiles
particularly where we have got clayey soils which is in many of the coastal areas
and Eastern India where the soil is clayey and it just cannot take the load, so we
have to put in Geotextiles and we have to pack it with sand and we have other
techniques to see that the soil takes the load.

4.83

The Committee referred to some reports that when some of the roads were

handed over to NHAI from State Highways for four-laning, immediately after handing
over, the State Government stopped taking care of those roads and even NHAI was not
maintaining them. The representative of Ministry of Road Transport & Highways
responded as follows:
It was happening earlier. But now we have decided that we do not hand over
the highways to the NHAI until the work is awarded. So, prior to the awarding of
the work, we are continuing the maintenance through the State Public Works
Department. We handover the highways only when they award the work to the
concessionaire. So, the problem which was there earlier now is no longer there.

4.84

The Committee wanted to know that in the EPC (Engineering, Procurement,

Construction) contracts, whether there is any provision about contractors maintaining

the roads for a stipulated number of years after its construction, the representative of
the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways responded as follows:

83

In these contracts, maintenance is not part of the contract, however, one year
defects liability period is there wherein we retain his performance guarantee and
within one year if there is any defect noticed that he has to repair or rectify.

4.85

The Committee further referred to the successful PMGSY (Pradhan Mantri Gram

Sadak Yojana), which has an inbuilt maintenance clause of 5 or 7 years. In this regard,
the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways submitted that

a policy decision

regarding inclusion of 3-5 years post construction maintenance in construction

contracts would be taken in consultation with Ministry of Finance, as commitment of
funds was to be made.

4.86

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways further updated during

the evidence as under:

On the recommendations of the Committee, we had put up this to the Minister
and we have already amended it, based on the recommendations of the
Committee, to three years.

4.87

When the Committee enquired about the instrument of supervision available with

the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to supervise/monitor the quality of roads
and maintenance undertaken, the Ministry, in a written statement, stated the following:
As far as the National Highways implemented by state Governments on behalf
of Ministry is concerned, the programme of periodic maintenance is finalized on
the advice of Ministrys regional officers (ROs) in charge of the respective
states. The works once awarded are directly monitored by ROs. Similar
procedure is followed for a flood damage repairs (FDR) and Special Repairs
(SR). As regards to routine maintenance, funds are subjected to availability and
paced at the disposal of State Governments who carry out their operations. In
the case of projects funded by NHAI where maintenance is being undertaken by
NHAI through O&M contractor, the maintenance of national highways is carried
out under the direct supervision of NHAI. Stretches under NHDP are maintained
under traffic worthy condition. In the case of BOT projects, NHAI has appointed
independent engineers to administer the contract. These independent engineers
supervise the quality of roads and maintenance undertaken.

84

4.88

The Ministry also informed the Committee of the following:

As part of improving the maintenance and repair of highways, NHAI
decided to formulate a Standard Maintenance Manual for ensuring uniformity in
the approach to carry out requisite maintenance of 4-laned/6-laned National
Highways through EPC and O&M contracts. Accordingly, M/s. Consulting
Engineering Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. was assigned the task of preparing the
said Standard Maintenance Manual which would comprise the following:

Maintenance

Operation and Maintenance Methodology to carry out

Manual

various maintenance activities

Part No. I
Maintenance

Standard bidding document along with BOQ, Item rate

Manual

analysis,

Part No. II

standards for Short term Operation and Maintenance

specifications,

drawings,

performance

including monitoring mechanism for item based contracts

Maintenance

Standard bidding document along with BOQ, Item rate

Manual

analysis,

Part No. III

standards for Short term Operation and Maintenance

specifications,

drawings,

performance

including monitoring mechanism for Performance based

contracts

M/s. Consulting Engineering Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. submitted a draft for all the
above mentioned 3 parts of the maintenance manual which is under examination.
The document on finalization is expected to not only ensure cost optimization but
also generate satisfaction among the road users due to timely and visible
maintenance operations.

4.89

The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways further added that the manual

aims to ensure uniformity in maintenance approach for completed highways in addition

to adoption of performance based maintenance with emphasis on preventive
maintenance instead of the conventional reactive maintenance. This approach would
reduce the cost of maintenance.

85

4.90

On the critical issue of inadequacy of funds for the maintenance of National

Highways, the Committee were informed by the Ministry of Road Transport and
Highways that the financial resources made available to the Ministry under
Maintenance & Repairs Head (Non-Plan) had been only about 40% of the requirement
based on approved norms and projected by this Ministry, as evident from the following
table:
Year

Requirement
as per
norms
(` Crore)

Amount
provided
(` Crore)

Shortfall
(` Crore)

2002 2003

2,200.00

800.00

1,400.00

63.64

629.54

2003 2004

2,200.00

731.74

1,468.26

66.74

731.62

2004 2005

2,480.00

745.56

1,734.44

69.94

679.03

2005 2006

2,480.00

868.10

1,611.90

65.00

838.31

2006 2007

2,480.00

814.38

1,665.62

67.16

784.30

2007 2008

2,280.00

1,001.70

1,278.30

56.07

981.35

2008 2009

2,500.00

973.97

1,526.03

61.04

969.45

2009 2010

2,500.00

1,059.10

1,439.56

57.58

981.49$

2010 2011

2,500.00

1,056.86

1,443.14

57.73

330.83

Provisional

%
Expenditure
Shortfall
(` Crore)

As on August10

The issue of inadequate allocation for Maintenance & Repair of NHs needs to be
urgently addressed to prevent premature failure of sections of NHs developed at large
capital investments on account of self-accumulation of deficiencies due to thin
spreading of available resources for M&R on large NH network.

4.91

The representative of the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways further added

the following during the briefing:

So, we are getting 35 to 40 per cent of our requirement for maintenance.
That is why we are not able to provide the maintenance to the required extent
because we are not having adequate funds for maintenance.
increase in the non-plan funding.

There is no

This matter is pending with the Planning

Commission and the Ministry of Finance.

86

4.92

When asked whether the matter of inadequate allocation for maintenance has

been taken up with the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry stated in a written reply that
against the demand of `2121.20 crore for Maintenance and Repair of National
Highways (M&R) for the year 2009-10, fund of `1036.44 crore were allocated at BE
stage. At RE stage, it was again requested to enhance the provision to `2000.00 crore
from `1036.44 crore for the purpose but no additional fund was provided by Ministry of
Finance for the year 2009-10. For the year 2010-11, fund amounting to `1032.86 crore
has been provided for M&R against the demand of ` 2000 crore at BE level. Ministry of
Finance has now been requested to provide additional fund of `1000 crore under M&R
raising the total allocation for the year to as `2032.86 crore.

4.93

Emphasising the fact that tolling is required for meeting maintenance costs, the

Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways added during the evidence held on
30th March, 2010:
What we would emphasize for the hon. Members benefit is that in road
construction, only 20% of the life cycle cost is initial construction. 80% is meant
for the maintenance over the life of the road. That is why this issue which was
raised about tolling, that you collect the initial cost and then, do not do any
tolling. We would be very happy to do that, provided the EC can recommend that
sufficient funds are placed at the disposal of the Ministry for Maintenance. At the
moment the budgetary provision is so tight that we do not feel that roads could
be adequately maintained without tolling.

87

(viii) ROAD SAFETY

4.94

India is witnessing swift upward movement of urbanization processes

accompanied by rapid motorization. A negative externality associated with expansion

in road network, motorization and urbanization in the country is the increase in the road
related accidents and deaths. All this makes road safety a vital issue to deal with.

4.95

As per the Ministrys Annual Report, road safety is a multi-sectoral and multi-

dimensional issue, which incorporates mainly three aspects, namely Engineering,

Enforcement and Education. The Engineering related aspects are being taken care of
at the design stage of the NH itself. The Enforcement aspect of the Road Safety is
vested with the respective States/Union Territories. The Education aspect of Road
Safety is taken care of through campaigns in print and electronic media, with the
involvement on Non-Government Organisations (NGOs).

4.96

The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has been mandated to formulate

policies for road safety so as to minimize road accidents. The important schemes
formulated and managed by the Road Safety Cell include publicity programmes,
National Highways Accident Relief Service Scheme (NHARSS), refresher training to
heavy vehicle drivers in unorganized sector etc. The Committee on Road Safety &
Traffic Management set up under the chairmanship of Shri S. Sunder, former Secretary,
MoST also formulated and recommended a National Road Safety Policy for
consideration of the Government. The National Road Safety Policy envisages greater
emphasis on awareness on road safety issues, establishment of road safety information
database, strengthening of driving licence system and training, better enforcement of
road safety laws etc. The policy also envisages setting up of a dedicated agency
namely National Road Safety & Traffic Management Board to oversee the road safety
activities in the country.

4.97

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways also added the

following during the evidence held on 30th March 2010:

We are aware that with development of national highway under NHDP and with
availability of better vehicles, the number of accidents has gone up and the
number of people killed in India is the largest. Recently, the Cabinet has
approved the recommendations made by the Sundar Committee on revamping
88

the Road Safety Organisation and the measures to be taken for improving the
road safety. We are now in the process of finalizing the Bill. It is expected that
the Bill will be introduced in the Session which will start after the recess. That Bill
comprehensively deal with all the aspects of road safety management.

4.98

The Committee are further informed that Road Safety Bill has been introduced in

the Lok Sabha in May, 2010, which proposes the creation of a Board for Road Safety
and Traffic Management. When the Committee enquired about the rationale behind the
creation of a separate body, keeping in mind that multiplicity of bodies will only lead to
procedural delays, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways elaborated in a written
statement as under:
Road safety is a multi-dimensional issue. In the existing scenario, various road
safety aspects are handled in a fragmented manner. There is no mechanism to
look into all these issues in a comprehensive manner. The agencies such as the
automotive

testing

institutions,

the

State

Governments,

the

Highway

administration authorities, trauma care management authorities such as Ministry

of Health are not single-handedly accountable for road safety issues. Moreover,
these institutions have limited role within their periphery of work and cannot be
considered as independent policy framing institutions for road safety issues.
Their role would remain same for the governance of regulation of vehicular traffic
on roads and peripheral work relating thereto. In this scenario, unless a
mechanism is put in place to have a dedicated agency to exclusively deal with
road safety issues authorizing it to have intensive coordination amongst all these
concerned agencies, it would not be possible to achieve the desired objective
with regard to various road safety issues. Most of the developed countries have
dedicated road safety institutions. Keeping in view the rising number of road
accidents in India, it is imperative to take pro-active measures to counter this
menace. The National Road Safety and Traffic Management Bill proposed by the
Ministry with a view to create National Road Safety and Traffic Management
Board with statutory backing is a step in the right direction and is as per the
international best practices. Once the Board is set up, it will be empowered to
oversee entire road safety activities in the country in consultation with all these
stakeholders including the existing agencies. None of the other agencies existing
today have the kind of statutory backing as proposed for the Board and hence,

89

the question of overlapping of functions would not arise. Moreover, the Board will
consult all these agencies before framing up its recommendations and would
thus carry considerable weightage for implementation by the Government. An
expert committee constituted by the Ministry under the Chairmanship of Shri S.
Sundar, Former Secretary (MoST) and Distinguished Fellow, TERI has
deliberated all the aspects in detail and has recommended creation of the Board
as an effective mechanism to take care of road safety issues in the country. It is
further stated that the Ministry has examined the recommendations of the
Department related Parliamentary Standing Committee on the Bill introduced in
Lok Sabha on 04.05.2010. The Ministry is examining various options to make the
Bill more comprehensive and objective oriented.

4.99

When asked to comment on the issue of service roads and safety, the Secretary,

Ministry stated the following during briefing:

.The fact is that NHAI is required to follow the Indian Road Congress manual
which prescribes where service road or the under pass should come. That takes
into consideration the issues relating to safety. Naturally, where traffic crosses a
particular level there should be a service road and of course, wherever the local
roads cross there has to be a proper underpass or some different way to see
that the local people are not put to any inconvenience.

4.100 On the issue of Trauma Centres for road accidents, the Secretary added:
I must say that the Cabinet has approved setting up of 140 such centres by the
Health Ministry and not by us. We are required to provide 140 ambulances
which we are doing. Cabinet has approved the scheme at the cost of `600
crore. We are very keen that these road safety issues are properly handled.

4.101 The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways further added following
technical requirements ensuring road safety during evidence:
on the four-lane roads, we insisted that there has to be certain width of
median in the four-laning. This is to ensure that if there are any accidents,
vehicles from one carriageway does not come to the other and cause blockage

90

of the road and cause stopping of the carriageway. In certain States like Kerala,
we do have acute problem of land acquisition; we tried to do four-lane; we are
trying to do in 45 metres width, where normally we require 60 metres width. The
result of doing it in less width is that service lanes which we would provide on the
sides for local traffic, in 30 metre width or 45 metre width, we simply cannot
provide that, which means that between the habitation and the highway, we do
not get a shoulder, that is, if somebody goes off the road, there is nothing to
sustain him. The roads are not just blacktopped portion; on both sides, we have
shoulder; if you go off the road at high speed, you do not immediately overturn.
You should be able to go on for some time. In areas where we do not get
sufficient width because of land acquisition problem, shoulder provision is not
possible, service lane provision is not possible. Also, the median provision on the
middle of the road becomes a problem. So, the two are interrelated getting
sufficient width is a technical requirement and it is there to ensure safety; it is
there to ensure safe movement of slow moving traffic; it is essential that if we
have to provide foot over-bridge, or some underpass, we have some sufficient
width so that the slope is not very steep whether you are going over or under
the road. So, these are technical requirements and we cannot waive them easily.
These are some of the issues which we would like to place before you.

4.102 Engineering/technical aspects of Road Safety are being taken care of at the
design stage of the National Highway (NH) itself.

Unfortunately, there are certain

sections of National Highways in different parts of the country, where there are
recurrence of fatal accidents. One such section referred to by the Committee is near
Kooteripattu on NH-45 (140 kilometers from Chennai). 260 people have already died
within three years since the opening of this section of highway. When the Committee
enquired whether the Ministry was aware about such incidents and actions initiated by
the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, to address problems of this kind, in a
written reply responded that Kooteripattu is grade intersection with vehicular traffic
towards Chennai on North, Trichy on South, Pondicherry on East and Gingee on West.
This junction is part of project for four laning of Tindivanam-Ulundurpet Section of NH45 on BOT basis which has already been widened to four lane and the junction
improvement as envisaged in the project has been completed. To prevent accidents at
this junction, the concessionaire has provided service roads on both sides of the main
carriageway and rumble strips on the cross roads. In addition to the above, blinkers,
91

speed limit boards, pedestrian crossing boards, median opening boards, etc have been
provided by the concessionaire. Studs have also been placed across the road to
indicate the pedestrian crossing and lighting arrangements have also been provided
along the road. As frequent accidents are occurring at this junction, the district
administration has placed temporary barricades across the road to reduce the speed of
the vehicles.

4.103 The Committee again raised the issue of Kooteripattu during the evidence held
on 24th September, 2010, stating that in 2009 also, 44 people died at the same place.
The Committee asked as to why a foot-over-bridge or a similar structure has not been
constructed there, the Chairman, NHAI stated:
We have no problem doing a pedestrian over-bridge... But the State
Government has asked for a complete grade interchange with a flyover, which is
quite expensive. We are preparing a report on it. A pedestrian over-bridge at
Kooteripattu is no problem, and we can sanction it.

92

(ix)

SUB-CONTRACTING OF PROJECTS

4.104 Many concessionaires of highway projects have been appointing sub-contractors

on engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) basis irrespective of lack of
experience and technical qualifications on their part. This not only affects the quality
and safety aspects of National Highways but also jeopardizes the timely completion of
projects. In this regard, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways informed the
Committee as under:
The intense competition among bidders and consequent reduced margin has
had one undesirable fallout. Many concessionaires are attempting to reduce
cost by employing sub contractors / EPC contractors on least cost basis. This
often results in very small companies taking up such work which has been seen
to affect the overall pace of work. To avoid such an eventuality, recently certain
changes were introduced in RFQ & RFP documents. A provision reading as
follows has been introduced in RFQ.
Applicant/ Consortium would provide an undertaking to NHAI that the
EPC works of the project would be executed only by such EPC
contractors who have completed at least a single package of more than
20% of the TPC or ` 500 cr. whichever is less.

Further, it is also now mandated that in RFP the bidders have to specifically
name the EPC contractors whom they intend to appoint for carrying out the
works.
The above steps have been taken to ensure that work does not suffer due to
appointment of substandard EPC contractors.

4.105 The Chairman, NHAI also added during evidence:

..there is this problem of subcontracting to smaller contractors. We have
therefore suggested an amendment stating that it was quite right that in the EPC
mode, only 30 per cent was permitted to be subcontracted with the permission of
the NHAI. I had the power to give permission, NHAI had the power to give
permission to subcontract up to 30 per cent of the work. It could be a smaller and
a medium man. Now, we try to regularize that by saying that if they are going to
subcontract, you need our permission and we also need to assure ourselves that
93

the subcontractor has got certain quality and he has got certain records. The
need to have people with higher degree of capital equipment is very clear.

4.106 The

Committee

wanted

to

know about

the

comparative

advantages-

disadvantages of small contractors over large contractors. The Committee also wanted
the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to comment on the reports/allegations
that policies followed by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways tend to favour
large contractors, who eventually sub-contracts the project. On this issue, the
Chairman, NHAI stated the following during evidence:
Our experience with small contractors was, somewhere a question has been put
in Parliament, in Lok Sabha also, we have pointed out that we have had two
experiences. One is EPC contract, they have typically undergone time and cost
overrun; there have been relatively very few small contractors who have shown
the ability to finish the projects.

4.107 The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways further submitted a written
statement, as follows:

a)

During 2008-09 response of the market for highway projects was

lukewarm and the number of Applicants seeking pre-qualification and actual

bidders had dropped considerably and many projects did not have any bidders at
all. Since certain features of bid documents, viz., RFQ/ RFP/ MCA was
perceived by the market as unnecessarily restrictive and taking away the
legitimate upside of business without really securing the downside, certain
relaxations in RFQ/ RFP and MCA were sought under the aegis of B.K.
Chaturvedi Committee. The effect of these relaxations introduced in November
2009 on the market response was spectacular and there was overwhelming
response to NHDP projects and the number of Applicants seeking prequalification had shown an increasing trend. For illustration, the following
projects for which RFQs were recently invited can be cited.

Name of Stretch

No. of applications received

Rohtak-Jind

51

94

b)

Seekur-Reengus

49

Jorhat -Shillong

14

Jorhat -Demow

Trichy -Karaikudi

36

Karaikudi - Ramanathapuram

35

Tindivanam- Krishnagiri

34

Dindigul - Theni

34

Palwal- Indapur

52

Bhopal- Sanchi

54

Jhansi-Khajuraho

43

Jabalpur-Rajmarg crossing

47

An analysis of the net-worth of Applicants/ members of Applicant

Consortiums was hence done to assess the financial strength of such

Applicants. Of the 88 Applicants/ Members whose net-worth position was
assessed on a standalone basis, it was found that the net-worth varies between
a very wide band of `14,023 Cr. to `0.005 Cr. These were put in value based
buckets and the range has been found to be as below:
Net-worth (in ` Cr)

0-100

100-250

250-1000

1000-3000

3000 and above

No of applicants

20

18

35

10

Hence, it was apparent that many applicants did not have the required means to
successfully execute road projects. It was also learnt that many such applicants
were forming synthetic associations with consortium partners who were merely
indulging in name lending, without actively participating in execution of projects.
c)

Given the large number of applicants participating at the prequalification

stage, there is a high probability of sub optimal bids being tendered. Market
conditions are dynamic and it is felt that these need to be responded to in an
appropriate manner, to ensure optimal bids. When relaxation to various
provisions in MCA/ RFQ/ RFP were sought in 2009 under the aegis of B.K.
Chaturvedi Committee, the situation was drastically different, when RFQ
response was very minimal and such a situation had to be responded to. Since
then, a need was felt to tighten certain norms. Hence it is incorrect to allege that
these were made to favor large contractors. On the contrary these changes
95

would lead to proper segmenting of the market and encourage formation of

viable and responsible coalitions.

96

(x)

ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE

4.108 A negative eventuality associated with the development of roads and national
highways is the destruction of trees and diversion of forest areas. A clearance is,
therefore, to be obtained from the Ministry of Environment and Forests, wherever such
a situation arises. However, many a times, this has led to inordinate delays in highways
projects.

4.109 The Committee were informed by the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways
that the Highway projects require the following clearances from Ministry of Environment
& Forests (MoEF):

1.

Environment clearance if the project length is more than 30 km and land

acquisition is more than 20 m put together;

2.

Forest clearance in case project involves diversion of forest land;

3.

Wildlife clearance in case the highway project passes through National

Park/Wildlife sanctuary.

Environment Clearance:
As far as environment clearance is concerned, no project is held up on account of
this. The projects submitted to MoEF for environment clearance are getting cleared
by the MoEF during its regular monthly meetings. One of the pre-requisites of
environment clearance is to have public hearing which is conducted by the State
Pollution Control Board (SPCB). It has been observed that there are delays by the
SPCB in convening such public hearings, which results in delay in submission of
final proposal to the MoEF.

Forest Clearance:
The forest clearance is a time consuming process as it is granted in two stages. In
the first stage in-principle approval is granted with certain conditions. After fulfilment
of the conditions, final clearance is granted by MoEF.

At times, the State

Government imposes some additional conditions which are unreasonable and

difficult to meet. These issues are to be resolved first for obtaining final clearance.
At times considerable time is lost in resolving these issues which eventually results

97

in delays in getting final clearance. In order to speed up the forest clearance NHAI is
holding regular meetings with the MoEF and the state forest departments.

At

present only 6 proposals are pending with MOEF. For resolving these issues,
meetings have been held at the highest level.

Wild life Clearance:

The wildlife clearance is long drawn process. The project is first required to be
cleared by the Chief Wild Life Warden and thereafter it is cleared by State Wild Life
Board, National Board of Wildlife, Central Empowered Committee and Honble
Supreme Court. The proponent authorities are required to seek clearance at two
stages, first at the time of surveying the area and thereafter for obtaining the final
clearance. There always remains an uncertainty with regard to whether the projects
on such alignments would receive final approval. All such projects require prior
approval of the Honble Supreme Court. It has been observed that all cases related
to wildlife clearance are listed and heard in the Honble Supreme Court dealing with
the cases of T. N. Godavarman.

The Godavarman case has more than 100

Interlocutory Applications and issues related to forest in general. Therefore, these

cases do not get priority and the listing of such cases gets delayed. NHAI finds it
difficult to compress the time frame as all the proposals related to wildlife invariably
go through extensive deliberations at various levels i.e. State Wildlife Advisory
Board, National Board of Wildlife and Honble Supreme Court. In spite of all these
difficulties NHAI has been able to get clearance in most of the projects. The
proposals where MoEF has divergent views from NHAI and where MoEF is not
agreeing to widening through National Parks/Sanctuaries, remain pending with
MOEF for a long. However, NHAI is holding regular meetings with MoEF on these
pending proposals. Presently, only 3 proposals are pending due to wildlife
clearance.

4.110 The Ministry further stated in a written reply that NHAI is to take permission
under Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and local laws for cutting of trees and diversion of
forest areas. In order to compensate the loss of trees, NHAI has to deposit the amount
for Compensatory Afforestation with the Forest Department. As per policy, the forest
department is to plant the trees in place of trees felled for which they are charging
NHAI. These charges are levied for twice the number of trees planted or more,
depending on the density and level status of the forest land along the national highway

98

where the trees are felled. The compensatory afforestation in lieu of cutting of old trees
or newly planted trees within 60m ROW for widening of 4-lane to 6-lane is carried out
along the highways (single row or double row as per the availability of land) and also on
the degraded forest. In this regard, sometimes revenue area is also taken for plantation
as per special conditions imposed by the State Government.

4.111 The Chairman, NHAI elaborated during evidence:

The policy is that for every tree we are cutting, we are depositing money with
the State Forest Corporation equivalent to three trees, which have to be planted.
But because only limited trees we can plant in the right of the way, we are doing
that after the project is fully completed. The trees are not planted right near the
blacktopping. They are planted 15 to 20 metres away where we are having
sufficient width. This is the first point. The Ministry of Environment and Forests
has been suggesting that they want trees planted right next to the highway. They
are not permitted under the courts order.

They cause drainage and other

problems. These shady roads are intended really for bullock carts and for
traditional modes of travel. ........In general, when we are widening the four lanes,
we are designing them for a speed of 80 kilometre. Now, with 80 kilometre of
speed, we do not want to plant any tree within 14 to 15 metres of the highway
because if there is any accident, if any vehicle leaves the highway running at 80
kilometre speed, it would go and hit the tree if the tree is next to the
highway......... When you are travelling with 80 kilometre speed, trees planted too
close to the highways are a traffic hazard. So, we have got our own norms for
doing that. Because we do not have sufficient land to plant three trees for every
tree cut, we are depositing funds with the Forest Department of the State. They
are planting three trees in other areas, which are there. The Ministry of
Environment and Forests is well aware of this. The statements may be made in
the press; they may not be reliable. But all the figures stating as to how many
trees we have planted, where they have been planted, are available with the
State Forest Department. We have only limited space. We cannot create forest
just next to the road. They are a big traffic hazard. They are not permitted.

4.112 The Chairman, NHAI further added:

99

As regards environment, the proposal, clearances and everything is prepared

by the State Government and then it goes all the way to various bodies including
local Chief Conservator of Forests, Government of India and the empowered
body The Committee on Environment headed by the Prime Minister
had directed to constitute a Committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary. There
is an empowered Committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to resolve interMinisterial issues with regard to the implementation of the NHDP. So, it is our
attempt that body becomes strong. In fact, we have suggested to the Ministry of
Forest and Environment that there should be a comprehensive system in which
environment clearance for roads can be given faster. But the fact remains that it
is subject to the same clearance and norms as other projects are. So, we have
tried to make out a case that projects like power and all that are different and
roads are different. We have not yet succeeded but we will continue to try.

4.113 While explaining the massive delays of highway projects due to lack of
environmental clearances, the representative of the Ministry of Road Transport and
Highways informed the Committee about a particular project of NH-24 i.e. Hapur to
Garmukteshwar, having total length of 35 kilometes. The representative stated as
under:
Only the four-lane of 15 kilometres has been completed. The work relating to
the majority portion of the length is going on. It is delayed due to primarily two
reasons. One is that the clearance is to be made by the Ministry of Environment
and Forests.

Here, there is a very peculiar problem.

The Ministry of

Environment and Forests is not able to give clearance because they are looking
forward for the recommendations of the State Wildlife Board. But as there is no
State Wildlife Board constituted, there is no question of any recommendations of
the State Wildlife Board. Whenever we are approaching the Central Ministry that
the project had come up for clearance, they say, it should come with the
recommendations of the State Wildlife Board. In the State, where there is a
statutory requirement to constitute the State Wildlife Board, they have not
constituted it.

We have been pursuing with the Environment and Forests

Ministry. But it is now for them to find a solution to this because in this process,
we do not get any clearance and our project will not be able to proceed further.

100

(xi)

PORT-CONNECTIVITY PROJECTS

4.114 Port Connectivity projects are the integral component of phase-I of National
Highways Development Project (NHDP), comprising a length of 380 Kms for
improvement of roads connecting 12 major Ports of the country to National Highways.
These projects envisage better connectivity and integration of ports with hinterland.

4.115 The status of Port Connectivity Projects is given in Annexure X.

4.116 During their interactions with the Ministry as well as in their study visit
discussions, the Committee had expressed concern over the Mormugao Port
connectivity project and Chennai-Ennore Port connectivity project, which have hit
severe roadblocks and are yet to be completed.

4.117 In respect of Mormugao Port connectivity project under NHDP Phase I, out of
18.3 km length, 13.1 km was completed way back in 2004, but the balance work was
awarded in June 2009 only. When the Committee enquired for the reason of this delay
and asked for the likely date of completion of this project, the Ministry of Road
Transport and Highways, in a written reply stated.
The work beyond 13.10 km. could not be taken up because of non-completion
of rehabilitation and land acquisition work by the State Government. As per the
direction of Honble High Court, the State Government was ordered to hand over
the balance stretch of 5.2 km. by 30 Sept. 2009. So far 4.18 km. stretch has
been handed over. Keeping in view the Court order, the balance work has
already been awarded and agreement signed on 23 rd Sept. 2009 with a
completion period of 2 years from date of start. The work is likely to commence
shortly.

4.118 On this issue, the Ministry subsequently informed the Committee about the
following:
As per the directives of the Honble High Court of Bombay at Goa, PWD, Govt.
of Goa has handed over 4.02 km to NHAI out of the balance 5.20 km. The
remaining 1.18 km which is still occupied by encroachers and the same was to

101

be made available to NHAI by 30.09.2009 as per the directives of the Honble

High Court dated 21.08.2008. The Govt. of Goa has submitted Miscellaneous
Civil Application before the Honble High Court of Bombay at Goa on 23.09.2009
for modification of the earlier orders dated 16.04.2007 & 28.11.2007 issued by
the Honble High Court and for extension of time for another 6 months. The
matter is yet to be heard by the court and the last date of hearing was
13.08.2010. The next date of hearing has not been finalized till date. The work
for 4-laning of 5.2 km including flyover near Gate No. 9 has been awarded to M/s
KMC Constructions Ltd. on 23.09.2009 and at present work is under progress in
the available stretches.

4.119 Regarding Port-Connectivity project between Chennai port and Ennore port - two
extremely busy ports that cater very high volume of work, the Ministry of Road
Transport and Highways in a written reply, stated the following:
Chennai and Ennore Port Connectivity includes 9 km Tiruvottiyur Ponneri
Panchetti Road (TPP Road) and 15 km - (Manali Oil Refinery Road(MORR) +
Inner Ring Road (IRR) + 1.6 km EE + 3 groynes) road. In TPP road of 9 km, LA
process was delayed by Govt. of Tamil Nadu and due to this Contract was
terminated with mutual consent on 24.06.2008. In the second road of 15 km (MoRR + IRR + 1.6 km EE + 3 groynes), the contractor did not mobilize the work
and the contract was terminated due to this. After combining the above two road
works and adding a service road in TPP Road, bids was invited & received on
10.11.08 for the combined project and proposal was submitted to NHAI Board
on 17.11.08 in this regard. As the project cost increased from `309 crore to
`600 crore, NHAI Board directed to obtain confirmation of enhanced equity/debt
contribution from SPV partners.

But no clear commitment from all the

stakeholders (SPV partners) was made available. Due to this, the Bid for the
above work received on 10.11.2008 has been cancelled in December, 2009.
Invitation of fresh bid for the project will be taken up after receiving clear
commitment from all stakeholders for equity/debt contribution as per direction of
NHAI Board and shifting of 1800 project affected families from Ennore
Expressway.

102

(xii)

BALANCED REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

(a) HIGHWAYS PROJECTS IN NORTH-EAST

4.120 The transport sector has been marred by the imbalanced development of roads
& highways in certain regions of country, particularly the North-East region. The
condition of road transport and highways are dismal in these regions, nevertheless, no
substantial progress has been achieved in respect of awarded NHDP.

4.121 The Committee are informed that the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways
has been paying special attention to the development of the National Highways in the
North-Eastern region. A Special Accelerated Road Development Programme for North
Eastern region (SARDP-NE) has been envisaged, which aims at improving road
connectivity of State capitals with District headquarters and remote places of NE region.

4.122 According to the background material furnished to the Committee, out of 9

highways projects related to Assam, Zero progress were achieved in 8 projects (as on
30th August, 2009). The situation is more alarming because most of these projects have
already crossed the date of completion (as per contracts). When asked to state the
position in this regard, the Ministry, in a written reply, submitted:
Total Length of EW Corridor under NHDP PHASE- II in Assam from WB Border
to Silchar is 678 km. Four Laning of 18Km of Guwahati Bypass is completed.
Out of 26 packages under implementation, the work of 4-laning in 513 km length
on 21 packages are under various stages of progress with an average of 32%.
The work on 5 packages namely AS-21, AS-22, AS-24, AS-25 & AS-26 in
aggregate length of 116 km in NC Hills District of Assam is at standstill for over
one and half years since the Contractors namely M/s Continental Engineering
Corp.(AS-21 & AS-22);

M/s Gammon India Ltd. (AS-24 & AS-26) and M/s

Valecha-TBL (JV) (AS-25) have refused to take up the projects due to reasons of
adverse Law & Order and non availability of land. An effort is being made for the
foreclosure of 5 projects of NC3 Hills amicably. Two projects have already been
foreclosed on 15.12.2009. A stretch Balachera to Herangajo of 31Km length

North Kachar Hills

103

could not be awarded on account of non availability of clearance from MOEF, so

far, due to Borail Wildlife Sanctuary.

Progress on Projects was given as under:

The average progress for the contract packages is 32%, except for 5
projects in NC hills area where the progress is less than 10%
There are 5 projects where progress is 50 to 85%
There are 13 projects where the progress is 20 to 50%.
There are 3 projects where the progress is 10 to 20%.
The updated status of projects of EW corridors under NHDP Phase II in
Assam is given in Annexure XI.

4.123 When the Committee further asked the Ministry to expain the reasons for slow
progress and steps taken to address this issue, the Ministry in a written statement
stated that some of the reasons for slow progress and action taken in this regard are as
follows:

(i) Land Acquisition :

The matters pending with the Government of Assam regarding balance
3D notifications and 3G estimates are required to be expedited. Further, the
process of disbursement of compensation to the land owners, removal of
encroachments and handing over of land to NHAI is required to be expedited for
timely completion of 4-laning projects. The matter has been discussed with the
Assam Govt. to expedite the pending land acquisition issues.

(ii) Cutting of trees :

Only 62% trees have been cut so far. There are a number of trees in the
Reserve Forest land which are yet to be cut. These can be cut only after issue of
Reserve Forest clearance from Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF) Govt.
of Assam has been requested to expedite the submission of clarifications to
MoEF so that final clearance can be obtained at the earliest.

(iii) Shifting of Electrical poles & lines :

There are few stretches where the electrical poles have been erected by
the NHAI and the electrical lines have to be shifted by Assam State Electricity
104

Board (ASEB). In this regard ASEB has been requested to expedite the balance
work.

(iv) Reserve Forest Clearance :

In Principle approval has been obtained and funds for diversion of
363Ha Reserve Forest land and compensatory afforestation have been
deposited by NHAI more than one year back. Final clearance from MoEF is
awaited. MoEF has been requested to expedite the clearance of Reserve Forest.
(v) Law & Order situation :
The law & order situation in NC Hills district has not been good. There
were a number of militant attacks during Oct 2006 to July 2008. Two employees
of M/s Gammon India Ltd were killed in Dec-2006 & Jan-2008. Five employees
of M/s Valecha TBL (JV) were abducted in February 2008 and released after 45
days. Three employees of M/s ICT were abducted in May 2009.

The Contractors in NC Hills District have stopped the works in March 2008 and
the works have not been resumed till date. The contractors have stated that their
employees are not willing to work in that area and have requested for amicable
settlement of the five civil contracts. NHAI has agreed to foreclose these contracts and
further action is being taken accordingly. Two projects have been already foreclosed on
15.12.2009.

4.124 The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways also added the following:
Keeping in view the adverse Law & Order situation in NC Hills District, NHAI
has agreed for foreclosure of five Civil Packages No AS-21, AS-22, AS-24, AS25 & AS-26 under East West Corridor in Assam. Out of above, foreclosure of 2
civil packages AS-21 & AS-22 has been accomplished and process for
remaining 3 packages (AS-24, AS-25 & AS-26) is underway.

However, the

general Law & Order situation in the State appears to have improved and all out
efforts are being made in consultation with State Government to expedite the
progress of works. As regards delay in land acquisition, after due cooperation
from State Government, the progress of land acquisition has improved.
Regional office/ Project Directors of NHAI are making concentrated efforts to
105

accomplish the balance acquisition of land.

Moreover, the forest clearance

issues which were pending since last 4-5 years have been obtained from MoEF
recently. This will definitely expedite the progress of projects under East West
Corridor in Assam.

4.125 The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways also added the
following during the evidence:
.............law and order is a State subject. NHAI, of course, learnt it in the
process through interactions with the State Governments. For example, the
State Government of Assam came forward and said that we need to provide for
payment of some of the forces which are provided as security for contractors.
Now, this was not envisaged earlier. But then, as we went along, NHAI learnt it
and it had agreed to pay for some of the extra security services which have been
provided.

4.126 On this issue, the Secretary, Ministry further commented as under:

I must say that the road construction is slow in the States where land acquisition
is not taking place. The hon. Members can themselves appreciate the progress
in the Western and Southern parts of the country. Progress in UP, Bihar, Assam
and West Bengal is poor. We do not hesitate to accept it and the main reason is
land acquisition. I have gone to Assam four or five times. The present Chief
Secretary is or course taking interest but six packages are in North-Cachar
district. Right up to the Cabinet Secretary, everybody is making attempt but still
condition on the ground have not improved and the contractors have run away.
They do not want to do the work unless there is basic assurance about the law
and order. So, the position is, unless the State Government cooperate with
regard to land acquisition, providing protection to the contractors and with regard
to collection toll, things cannot move. For example, State like Orissa, Goa are
not cooperating in toll collection. The result will be the NHAI will be left with no
alternative but either to abandon the programme or to continue in a slow
manner.

So, we have to be very clear that unless the State Governments

cooperate, NHAI programmes cannot be implemented with the speed it needs to

be implemented.

106

4.127 When the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways was asked to comment on
the report that NHAI has decided to pursue project implementation by bypassing the
States where land acquisition is slow and leave those States out of the road building
loop, the Secretary, responded the following during evidence:
I think, we did not say by-pass. I think, it has appeared in the Press, though I
must share with you that there is no formal decision as of now. Perhaps I saw it
in the Press, and the hon. Member has referred to it, that the Minister told this.
The idea is like this. I do not want to name the State. Suppose a State does not
want to cooperate in land acquisition, what is the solution? You have to either
drop the project or even close the ongoing project because we do not have any
alternative. This is what it means.

4.128 On the issue of imbalanced regional development of national highways, the

Ministry also stated in a written communication:
Being a market oriented delivery mechanism, BOT should be adapted to market
requirements. However BOT tends to localize development to areas which are
already developed. There is a serious risk of undeveloped areas remaining
undeveloped and differences getting further accentuated. Undeveloped areas
are getting very low bid response. The number of bids received for projects
falling in such areas vis--vis other developed areas provide sufficient evidence
to this factor. This has already been brought to the Central Governments notice
by NHAI. Hence there has to be a balanced approach in adopting of the correct
mode which will help in preventing unbalanced development. For commercially
non-viable projects and for undeveloped areas alternate strategies would need
to be evolved urgently.

107

(b) IMPROVEMENT OF ROAD CONNECTIVITY IN LEFT WING EXTREMISM (LWE)

AFFECTED AREAS:-

4.129 In order to improve the road connectivity in the Left Wing Extremism (LWE)
affected areas, the Government has come up with a scheme for development of
National Highways and State roads in the area of 33 districts in eight States at an
estimate cost of `7300 cr. Under the scheme, development of identified stretches of
NHs (1202 kms) and State roads (4362 kms) to two lane standards are planned to be
taken up in a phased manner in the next three years, subject to adequate security
arrangements being provided by the respective State Governments / Central Agencies.
An allocation of `500 cr. was made for the year 2009-10 (BE). This has been modified
to `125 cr. at a RE stage for 2009-10. For the year 2010-11, the budgetary outlay for
LWE areas is `1000 cr.

4.130 When the Committee enquired why the funds utilization for current year is very
low, the Secretary, during the evidence, held on 24 th September, 2010, stated the
following:
.of course, the utilization has been less because the awards have been
only recent. Current year, it is `1,057 crore, but award has been there significant
in the last about six months. But I take your point on record. We will try and see
how best we can try and coordinate, even though the award of projects is by
State Governments.

4.131 Left Wing Extremism in the country is to a large extent, funded out of the
extortion/concession, which the naxals get from every Government contractors. All this
make the entire development strategy counter-productive & self-defeating. When the
Committee asked whether any physical vetting of contractors is carried out, before
awarding the contracts in naxalism/LWE affected areas, the Secretary during
evidence stated:
For the construction, we leave it entirely to the State Governments. So, it is the
State PWD which does the contracting or the construction. So, the straight
answer to your question is, no; we do not get the contractors verified with the
Home Ministry or we ourselves verify so, the answer is, no
108

4.132 When the Committee emphasized upon the need to get verification of
contractors in LWE areas, the Secretary said as under:
The point made by the hon. Members is a very valid point. I would agree with
you. we will try to address this issue.

4.133 The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways in a written reply further added
that the matter regarding checking credentials of contractors of LWE roads to avoid
diversion of funds to LWE groups would be examined in consultation with State
Governments and Union Ministry of Legal Affairs.

109

OBSERVATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS

1.

Physical infrastructure has a direct bearing on sustainability of growth and

overall development of a nation. Thus, roads in general and National Highways in

particular can be termed as a fundamental plank for the sustained and inclusive
growth of a country. In order to meet infrastructural requirements as well as to
provide a boost to the economic development, the Government of India embarked
upon an ambitious highway programme i.e. the National Highways Development
Project (NHDP) in the late 90s in a phased manner. The project envisaged rapid
construction of highways across the country to improve connectivity between
hitherto unconnected regions for trade, investment and employment generation,
for which targets were fixed. However, the Committee are constrained to note that
several impediments have plagued the project leading to inordinate delays in
completion of projects as per target. Absence of comprehensive Toll Policy,
delays in Land acquisition and obtaining of clearances from the Environment and
Railway Ministries, law and order problems, non-performing contractors and poor
maintenance of existing highways are some of the most critical issues, which
need immediate attention. The Committee also feel that alongwith these, other
issues such as balanced regional development of National Highways and road
safety measures need to be addressed to create a world class network of National
Highways. As the situation warranted a concerted, coordinated and coherent
effort to expedite the progress of NHDP, the Committee had selected the subject
National Highways Development Project including implementation of Golden

110

Quadrilateral for examination. The observations and recommendations of the

Committee on the subject after a detailed study and scrutiny of the same are
given in the subsequent paragraphs.

111

2.

The Committee, while reviewing the financial plan of NHDP, note that the

quantum of financial resources required for implementation of Highway projects

is significantly high. An estimated expenditure of ` 200 crore is required everyday
for these projects for a period of 15-20 years. As the Government resources are
not enough for such capital intensive activity, an efficient financing plan
mobilizing all sources needs to be worked out to ensure steady flow of funds for
the various highway projects. Moreover, Highway projects awarded on PublicPrivate Partnership (PPP) mode, which has now emerged as the primary mode of
Highway construction in the present scenario are characterized by back-ended
cash flows and require term loans for longer periods i.e. 10 to 20 years with backended repayment structure. In other words, Highway concessions have tenures
extending upto 30 years and they need loan facilities for upto 75-80% of such
tenure. Since both the capital market and institutional mechanisms appear to
have constraints in providing long term structured sources of funds, private
investors pick the project selectively as they find it difficult to access capital. The
Committee

observe

that

Ministry

of

Finance

is

already

pursuing

the

recommendation of several High level Committees such as the Deepak Parekh

Committee, Patil Committee, Percy S. Mistry Committee and Raghuram Rajan
Committee on the subject of Availability of long term debt. The Committee also
appreciate that in order to discuss and evolve consensus on issues relating to
infrastructure financing, a High level Standing Committee on Infrastructure
Finance has also been set up under the chairmanship of the Finance Secretary,
with representation from various stakeholder groups.

112

In this regard, the Committee are of the firm opinion that the Government
intervention is not only desired but also indispensable to enable faster capital
inflows and resource mobilization in this infrastructure sector. The Committee,
therefore, suggest that in the current environment, when the economy is coming
out of recession, it is none but imperative that the issue of availability of long
term debt with back-ended repayment structure is pursued at the highest level in
order to provide an institutional mechanism for specialized infrastructure
financing. The Committee further desire that the creation of this institutional
mechanism should be done within a stipulated time frame to avoid any project
delay due to financial crunch. The Committee also agree with the suggestions
made in the World Bank Report on Financing Infrastructure, which stress upon
the need for specialized infrastructure institutions such as Infrastructure Leasing
and Financial Services (IL & FS) and Infrastructure Development Finance
Corporation (IDFC) to participate at the design stage/ DPR stage of a project in
order to make it easier for project developers to obtain finances as well as to
provide the developer with the opportunity to use the expertise of such
institutions in project designing & financial structuring. The Committee also note
that the Ministry of Power have reportedly set up an Inter-Institutional Group
(IIG), consisting of infrastructure developers and senior representatives from
banks and financial institutions, which has proved to be of substantive help in
resolving any outstanding issues or disputes between the developers and
various funding agencies. The Committee suggest that the Ministry of Road
Transport and Highways should emulate such models with a view to removing

113

bottlenecks and increasing investment in NHDP, while taking adequate care of

conflicts of interests, if any, arising between the institutions and the Government.

114

3.

The initial phases of NHDP were public funded. However, later the Public-

Private Partnership (PPP) emerged as a viable financing option for Highway

projects from Phase-III onwards as funds from traditional sources were
insufficient to meet increased investment needs. The Committee note that the
Government has now planned an investment of ` 3,31,000 crore in the period
2009-2015 for upgradation of NH network, predominantly in the PPP mode.
Experience of Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model shows that involvement of
private player and management augur well for the efficiency and quality of Road
sector. However, the progress of awarding projects has been rather slow. The
Committee have been informed by the Ministry that Waterfall mechanism of
awarding project, which was one of the major impediments in the award process,
has since been abandoned and now road projects will be carried out on all the
three modes of delivering viz. BOT (Toll), BOT (Annuity) and EPC (Engineering
Procurement Construction contract) concurrently rather than sequentially. From
the latest Economic Survey (2010-11) document, the Committee observe that the
Work Plan for 2010-11 stipulates that of the total NH length to be developed,
broadly 60 per cent would be taken up on BOT (Toll) basis, 25 per cent on BOT
(Annuity) basis and the remaining 15 per cent on EPC basis. The Committee have
also been informed in this regard that now a road project not found prima facie
suitable for BOT (Toll) can be implemented directly on BOT (Annuity) and
decision regarding the same will be taken by an IMG (Inter-Ministerial Group).
However, still before implementing a project on EPC basis, it will be compulsorily
tested for BOT (Annuity) and only if unacceptable bids are received, then the

115

project will be awarded on EPC basis. The Committee are of the view that there is
urgent need to streamline the system to cut delays caused by lengthy
procedures. They would like to be apprised of the status of projects post the
waterfall mechanism and hope that at least now the long delays in completion
of NH projects would be avoided.

116

4.

The Committee observe that Highway sector has a large shelf of projects,

which can be readily offered to private players, including those which had a
serious setback in the year 2009-2010 due to global financial meltdown. Since the
financial crisis is now over, the Committee suggest the Ministry to take concerted
efforts to attract private players in this sector. Apart from an enabling fiscal
environment, development of mutual trust is the fundamental pre-requisite to
encourage entry of private investors. Organization of Business conclaves
periodically with active cooperation of FICCI, CII and other corporate bodies may
also lead to a positive response. In respect of pending Highway projects due to
non-response/low response of private investors, the Committee urge the Ministry
to explore various possibilities to attract bidders by way of revising the project
cost, providing funds on concessional interest rates and providing updated &
authentic traffic data flexibility in the Concessional Agreement too.
From the deposition of the Ministry made before them, the Committee also
note that one of the fundamental problems faced by the private investor is
experiments of Government policy with many formats with varying degrees of
success. Changes in the policy guidelines as well as project documents such as
MCA (Model Concession Agreement), RFQ (Request for Qualification) and RFP
(Request for proposal) have caused severe disruption of the award process in the
past. The Committee feel that private investment flow into the Highway sector will
purely depend on the consistent, adoption of long term policies and their
adherence by the Government and therefore, there is an urgent need to
standardize project documents and streamline policy guidelines vis--vis Public-

117

Private Partnership (PPP). The Committee also suggest that a comprehensive

review of project documents and policy guidelines keeping in mind the needs of
foreseeable future should be undertaken urgently. In this context, the Ministry
may involve experts/ specialized institutions and study best practices so as to
facilitate an investor-friendly environment for NHDP. It has come to the notice of
the Committee that there have been instances where collection of toll was stated
to have been started even before the construction of road commenced/was
completed. The Committee, therefore, desire that a financial and technical review
of all Model Concession Agreements (MCA) should be carried out by an
independent Committee of outside experts and their findings submitted to this
Committee at the earliest.

118

5.

From the perusal of outlays under different modes of delivery of NHDP

2005-2015, the Committee note that 98.6% of expenditure envisaged is accounted

by BOT (Toll) and BOT (Annuity) Modes of PPP projects. The Committee are
distressed to note that there is hardly any role for Engineering Procurement
Construction Contract (EPC) mode. As there are various highway projects in
different parts of the country, which may not be commercially viable and thus
attract very slow/non-response from the market, there is a need for introspection.
The Committee also observe that, the Built Operate Transfer (BOT) mode of
delivery, being a market driven delivery mechanism, tends to localize
development to areas, which are already developed, leading to a serious risk of
underdeveloped areas being ignored and differences getting further accentuated.
Also some sections of Highways will not be attractive for bidders due to serious
law and order problems, complex land acquisition issues etc. The Committee are
of the view that in these areas, the Government has to play a more significant
role, acting not only as a facilitator but also as an active instrument of inclusive
growth

and

balanced

regional

development.

The

Committee,

therefore,

recommend that those projects, which have not been able to attract private
investors so far, should not be left to be doomed and that the Ministry should
evolve alternate strategies for such projects on priority basis. Resorting to EPC
mode of delivery could be one of them.

119

6.

National Highways Development Project (NHDP) the largest highways

project ever undertaken by the country, was initiated in the late 90s to create,
develop and improve network of 70,934 km of National Highways throughout the
country. However, the Committee are pained to note that the progress of most of
the projects has not been satisfactory due to procedural delays, land acquisition
issues, contractual problems and other factors. Even the Secretary, Ministry of
Road Transport & Highways has conceded slow down in NHDP projects. The
Committee would like to cite a few examples of the delays like phases 3A & 3B
involving 12,109 kms, in which only 2048 kms has been completed and the noncompletion of Golden Quadrilateral connecting the four metro cities, even on the
revised date of December, 2010. The Ministry have now assured the Committee
that by 31st March, 2011, around 5,500-5,800 kms of roads under NHDP would be
awarded, which would be the highest ever award. The Ministry also appears to be
confident about the next years target of 7,300 kms. The Committee would like to
be apprised of the actual length awarded out of the present years target.
However, in view of the poor performance so far, they fail to understand the
rationale behind expanding NHDP, without even completing Phases I & II and the
Golden Quadrilateral. As regards certain impediments in the Highways projects,
with the setting up of an Empowered Group of Ministries, those bottlenecks are
expected to be tackled effectively. The Committee are of the opinion that absence
of coordination among different Ministries/agencies and State Governments is
the root cause of delay at every stage. The Committee, therefore, recommend that
Ministry must utilize the revised mechanism effectively and strive hard to develop

120

coordination among different agencies at different levels so that various stages

of Highway construction could be completed as per the workplans.

121

7.

The Committee are distressed to note that flagship project of NHDP i.e.

North-South East-West (NS-EW) corridor has been crippled with inordinate

delays. All NS-EW corridor projects, which are under-implementation, have well
passed the date of completion as per the contracts, which reveals a sorry state of
affairs. The project was earlier scheduled to be completed by December, 2009
after several extensions, but later on the Committee were informed about yet
another extension as December, 2010. The project is still incomplete as 444 km of
the same is yet to be awarded as on date. The deposition of the Ministry that
actual date of completion can be estimated only after all projects of NS-EW
corridor are awarded, is in fact fallacious. The Committee are also not convinced
with the reasons submitted by Ministry for such enormous delays. The
Committee, therefore, recommend that all earnest efforts should be made for
expeditious completion of NS-EW corridor project, balance work should be
awarded without any further delay and a High level group, such as the NHAI
Board, should be entrusted with the responsibility to supervise/monitor the
progress of this project fortnightly, so that appropriate action could be taken to
avert any further delay. The Committee are convinced that setting unrealistic
targets due to poor planning is the reason for repeated extensions of the target
date for completion of this project. Constant delays not only projects the Ministry
in a bad light but also leads to cost overruns, hence the Committee suggest that
Ministry should adopt a realistic approach in respect of fixing targets for the NSEW corridor project and adhere to it.

122

8.

As regards the Golden Quadrilateral, an integral component of NHDP

phase-I, the Committee are dismayed to note an unprecedented delay in

completion of the same. The project was originally scheduled to be completed by
March, 2004 as per original mandate of Task Force. However, by that time, hardly
53.03% of project could be completed, which raises serious doubts about the
inception, planning, implementation and monitoring of programme. Even after
seven years, the Golden Quadrilateral is still not complete. What the Committee
find more disturbing is the attempt of the Ministry justify the delay on the ground
that programme of this magnitude was unprecedented and also the construction
industry in road sector was not adequately developed to take the work of this
scale. With the decision of the Government to allow import of heavy road
construction equipment, the delay should have been minimized, which is not the
case. The Committee deplore such attitude on part of the Ministry. NHAI has
reportedly now formulated a revised strategy for implementation of projects as 14
Regional Offices have been opened and for land acquisition 192 special land
acquisition units have been created at State Level. In view of the long duration of
the projects, the Committee are of the view that this strategy should have been
planned much earlier. The Committee now exhort the Ministry to monitor the
implementation of Golden Quadrilateral project vigorously and complete it
without any further delay. The Committee further recommend that as the Golden
Quadrilateral project connects the four mega cities, the upkeep and maintenance
of Highways developed under this ambitious project should be accorded highest
priority. In addition, the Committee also feel that without the proper development

123

of Highways network around hub cities of the Golden Quadrilateral, Highways

cannot act effectively as instruments of balanced regional development and
inclusive growth. They, therefore, recommend that Ministry should make tangible
efforts to build spokes from each of the hub cities of Golden Quadrilateral,
commensurate with the hubs and spokes pattern of transport system. During
the examination of the subject, the Ministry had informed the Committee that the
work plan to cover about top 300 towns in terms of population around hub cities
was under consideration. The Committee would like to be apprised of the
decision taken by the Ministry in this regard, alongwith the latest status of the
Golden Quadrilateral project.

124

9.

The Committee feel that provisions of collection of fee/toll in perpetuity is

fundamentally wrong and thus needs to be reviewed in the light of gained

experiences. During the examination of the subject, the Committee also came
across some disturbing instances such as toll collection from the areas, where
condition of roads are very poor, exorbitant increase/hike in toll rates, toll plazas
being set up in close proximity with each other etc. The Committee are also not
satisfied with the financial model of NHAI to indicate the benchmark Internal Rate
of Return (IRR), which determines the optimum concession period within which
the concessionaire would recover the capital cost of the project and other project
related expenditure besides earning a reasonable return. The Committee,
therefore, would suggest the Ministry to review and revisit the Rules and
Regulations regarding collection of toll, so that it does not become an instrument
of malpractice and unjust profiteering by unscrupulous elements to harass the
general public. The Committee further recommend that a just and comprehensive
methodology should be evolved for computing the concession period based on
sound financial evaluations.
The Committee also note that the Highway projects are highly dependent
on the traffic volume/assessment Report not only for the fixation of toll rates but
also for fixation of concession period. Unavailability of updated and accurate
traffic volume data/Report often leads to incorrect forecasts and wrong
estimation of concession period. The Committee, therefore, emphasize that there
is an urgent need to strengthen instrument of traffic volume data/Report in order
to address the problems of current system. In this connection, the Committee are

125

aware that of late the Government, particularly the Ministry of Urban

Development, has been encouraging projects to introduce the Intelligent
Transport System (ITS) for collecting real time data for effective traffic
management. An Inter-Ministerial Core Group on ITS has also been set up by the
Government to establish a National framework for ITS. The Committee therefore
recommend that the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways may coordinate with
their counterparts in relevant sectors so that the positive benefits of the accurate
traffic data could be utilized to work out standard provisions for toll collection on
the National Highways.

126

10.

Toll collection work of EPC projects is being carried out through DGR

(Directorate

General

Resettlement,

Ministry

of

Defence)

sponsored

Ex-

servicemen. However, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has been candid
before the Committee to acknowledge that several complaints regarding pilferage
of revenue and non-compliance of contract conditions have been received, some
of which have been proved too. In this connection, the Committee have been
informed that the Ministry has come up with New Policy for engagement of Fee
collecting Agencies to address these issues. While the impact of the new policy
remains to be seen, the Committee are of the view that the instrument of
supervision needs to be further strengthened and streamlined. They, therefore,
recommend that Ministry of Road Transport and Highways should develop an
effective mechanism in coordination with NHAI to monitor toll collection not only
in EPC projects but also in PPP projects (BOT Toll & Annuity) with a view to
obviate unnecessary harassment of the highway users by way of an illegal and
unscrupulous method of toll collection.

The Committee also desire that the

recommendations of the Committee under the Chairmanship of Shri Nandan

Nilekani on Electronic Toll Collection should be implemented at the earliest.

127

11.

Land

acquisition

for

development,

maintenance,

management

and

Operation of National Highways is a complex process, which is administered by

section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956. However, the Committee have
observed certain differences between National Highways Act, 1956 and the Land
acquisition Act, 1894, due to which the Government has frequently encountered
resistance and agitation by the PAPs (Project Affected Parties). There is a
provision in the LA Act to provide for payment of an interest amount calculated at
the rate of twelve per cent, over and above the market value of the land for the
period commencing on and from the date of publication of the notification under
sub-section (1) of section 4, in respect of such land to the date of award of the
competent authority or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is
earlier, subject however to the condition that in computing such period, any
period or periods during which the proceedings for the acquisition of the land
were held up on account of any stay or injunction by the order of any court shall
be excluded. In addition, a provision also exists for awarding a sum of 30% as
solatium amount, over and above the market value of the land in consideration of
the compulsory nature of the acquisition. Consequently, the land owner, from
whom land is acquired under the National Highways Act, is in a disadvantageous
position as compared to the one whose land is acquired under the Land
Acquisition Act. From the deposition of the Ministry, the Committee further
observe that the National Highways Act does not provide for any time-limit for
making an application by the aggrieved party to the arbitrator. As a result, the
land owners approach the arbitrator even after 2-3 years from the date of

128

determination of award and these cases remain unsettled for long, leading to
inordinate delay in complete procedure.
Although Ministry has submitted a proposal for the necessary amendments
to NH Act, the Committee fail to understand as to why the Ministry took so long to
propose amendments to NH Act 1956 despite more than 15 years of experiencing
hurdles under NHDP. Besides, such a proposal is not being pursued vigorously
in order to facilitate smoother acquisition of land for future projects under
various phases of NHDP. The Committee feel that there is an urgent need to
streamline the Land Acquisition process and, therefore, recommend that Ministry
should take necessary steps to amend the existing NH Act, 1956 in order to
incorporate firstly, provision of compensation as per provisions of Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 and second, provision of timeframes for declaration of
awards by Competent Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA), disbursement of
compensation and initiation/completion of arbitration. The Committee desire to
be apprised of the status of the proposal submitted for making amendment in the
NH Act.

129

12.

The Committee observe that the issue of land acquisition in general and

compensation in particular is extremely sensitive. The Competent Authority for

Land Acquisition (CALA), who are generally officers of Local Revenue
Departments, are empowered to fix the compensation. However, the Committee
came across innumerable complaints of inadequate compensation from PAPs
(Project Affected Parties) and consequent long drawn arbitrations, which
seriously affect the progress of NHDP. The Committee would like to particularly
mention States like Kerala and Goa. In these States, several stretches of National
Highways are hemmed in by dense residential and commercial structures, which
are under constant fear of demolition owing to Highway Projects. As a result in
these States, the process of land acquisition has been severely affected. The
Committee feel that land acquisition and displacement/rehabilitation of people for
NHDP needs a very careful and proactive role of the nodal Ministry.

Before

commencement of the project, the concerned State Government as well as Local

Administration/ representatives should be effectively consulted to ensure smooth
acquisition of land or rehabilitation of displaced persons. Association with the
local peoples representatives, MPs and MLAs, can also prove to be quite
effective. All rehabilitation processes should be in place before undertaking any
such project. The Committee concur with the views of the Ministry that the Chief
Secretaries should be made Nodal Officers by the State Governments for land
acquisition, as they are in a better position to coordinate with various agencies
involved in the process in their States. Though only few States have done so, the

130

Committee desire the Ministry to pursue this with other State Governments,
vigorously.
The Committee further observe that the State Governments/District
Collectors have been extremely conservative in awarding compensation and it is
the sole reason for landowners to keep litigating for decades in the hope of better
compensation and therefore, suggest that there is an urgent need to sensitize
State Governments/CALAs/Arbitrators to take into account future development
potential of the land for its owner, while awarding the compensation. The
Committee are of the firm view that the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways,
being the nodal Ministry for Highway construction, development & maintenance,
can play a pivotal role in this regard.
The Committee further observe that in respect of Kerala and Goa, the
Ministry/NHAI and respective State Governments have been stuck with the issue
of 35 metres/ 45 metres/ 60 metres of highway width and unprecedented delay
encountered in the completion of projects are likely to make those redundant in
the light of ever increasing vehicular traffic. The Committee note the Ministrys
suggestion that in these cases, expressways with completely new alignment
and avoiding all human habitation, can provide the ideal solution. The Committee
do understand that the quantum of investment required for these green-field
projects would be very high, but considering the benefits, not only at present but
in future as well, the Government should give a serious thought to it without
further delay. The Committee also recommend that the Expressway Authority of
India., as envisaged and prioritized in the Eleventh Five Year Plan document
131

should be constituted as early as possible. The Committee are also of the view
that in cases similar to Kerala & Goa, where widening of Highways can lead to
displacement of local people or have an adverse effect on their livelihoods, the
construction of expressways should be considered from the initial stage itself.
They hope that these suggestions would be suitably incorporated in the XII Five
Year Plan, otherwise certain crucial National Highway Projects may not see the
light of the day at all.

132

13.

The Committee are extremely concerned to note that almost all works of

highway projects had been delayed or were likely to be delayed. In several cases,
period of these delays as well as corresponding cost escalations are substantial.
While agreeing that certain complex issues and impediments may come up in the
implementation of Highway projects, the Committee wish to emphasise that
issues such as Land acquisition, Railway clearance for Rail Over Bridge (ROB)
design, environmental clearance, shifting of utilities and poor performance of
contractors are of routine nature in a Highway construction and can be
addressed

with

effective

coordination,

supervision

and

pursuance

with

concerned organization/agencies.
Although few corrective measures have been taken by the Ministry, for
instance, posting of a Railways officer in NHAI to expedite clearances of ROBs,
changes in the process of awarding contracts, increase in the number of State
Level Land Acquisition Units etc, the Committee are of view that the Ministry and
NHAI have a major responsibility in this regard. The Committee are anguished to
note NIL progress (as length completed) in respect of NHDP, Phase IV, VI and VII
project, which were approved way back in the month of July, 2008, November,
2006 and December, 2007 respectively. The submission of the Ministry that
presently feasibility studies are being prepared for most of these projects, is
not convincing. The Committee desire that timelines should be set realistically
while announcing a new project, after taking into consideration the time required
on account of land acquisition, environment & forest clearance etc.

The

Committee also note that though in respect of BOT projects, delay does not have

133

a direct bearing on cost overrun, as the same is being incurred by

concessionaire, however in NHAI funded projects, delays in completion of project
undoubtedly compound the problem of cost overrun. Besides, the amount of
inconvenience suffered by general public due to pendency of projects, though
cannot be measured in monetary terms, remains huge. The Committee, therefore,
stress that what is required is a paradigm shift. In this new paradigm, procedures
need to be tightened and streamlined and the approach should be proactive and
preemptive. The Committee agree with the proposal of the Ministry that a project,
after preparation of DPR, should be decided in the first instance itself, whether it
is to be considered for procurement on BOT(Toll)/BOT (Annuity) or EPC. This will
save the invaluable time lost due to the trial and error method being followed
presently. The Committee urge the Ministry to strive hard in this regard. The
Committee further note that recommendations of the B.K. Chaturvedi Committee
have been implemented and a revised strategy for NHDP have been formulated.
As for now, the Committee understand that according to the revised strategy for
speedier implementation of projects, the Chief General Managers (CGMs) of 14
Regional Offices have been delegated financial as well as administrative powers
for execution of works.

In this regard, the Committee desire that the CGMs

should also be made accountable for delays in implementation of projects. It is

high time that responsibility for delays be fixed. The Committee also recommend
that the mechanism/instrument of supervision of targets needs to be strict. They
would like to know the impact of the revised strategy on NHDP, supported by
facts, in the action taken stage.

134

14.

The Committee observe that non-performance of contractors is one of the

major reasons for long delays in completion of Highway projects. Also, the
possibility of a nexus between middlemen, non-performing contractors and
corrupt officials siphoning off project funds cannot be ruled out. The Committee
have been given to understand that the contracts of such contractors, who do not
perform even after periodical review, are terminated and the bank guarantee for
performance security are encashed. As per stipulations, these contractors are
also not being pre-qualified for award of any future project in NHAI until their
performance improves. The Committee feel that in an atmosphere, where delays
have become a regular affair, blacklisting alone may not be effective and thus
there should be a provision to impose substantial cash penalty on the nonperforming contractors. The Committee, therefore, recommend that Ministry
should either incorporate a provision of financial penalty or raise the amount of
bank guarantee in the contract agreement. It will serve two purposes, firstly it will
be an effective instrument of penalty and will act as a deterrent for nonperforming contractors and secondly, it will keep away non-serious contractors
or the contractors, who do not have the requisite capabilities to undertake major
National Highway Project.

The Committee also recommend that the Ministry

should ensure that bank guarantee of a non-performing contractor is encashed

and a project is not re-awarded to a black-listed contractor.

Further, the

Committee would like to emphasize upon the fact that construction of Highways
through contracting and bidding requires a sharp and effective evaluation and
supervision of contractors.

Without this ability, poor contracting jobs will

135

jeopardize the projects. Thus, the Committee recommend that senior managers
in NHAI should be made to adopt an effective approach to hire capable
contractors and supervise them sincerely and efficiently. Equally important is the
need to be aware of the pitfalls of making inappropriate decisions in this direction
for which responsibility should be fixed and the erring officials penalized.

136

15.

Regular and planned maintenance and upkeep of National Highways are of

paramount importance in view of the overload they bear. Poor maintenance and
potholes on most of the Highways have turned them into an increased safety
hazard to the users. For instance, NH6, NH13 and NH34 are in bad condition.
Other glaring examples of the same are Mahatma Gandhi Bridge and Rajendra
Bridge in Bihar and Roopnarayan Bridge in West Bengal.

The Panvel-Goa

Highway and the Shivpuri by-pass are some other examples of certain spots
being severely accident-prone on National Highways. The Committee are
constrained to note that financial resources made available to the Ministry under
Maintenance and Repairs Head (Non-Plan) have been only about 40% of the
requirement during the last four years. The Committee are of the firm opinion that
if due maintenance cannot be provided to existing network of highways, all
efforts to expand its reach are meaningless and hence, recommend that
maintenance should be accorded highest priority and the issue of inadequate
allocation for maintenance and repairs of National Highways should be taken up
with Ministry of Finance and Planning Commission at the highest level. The
Committee also suggest that controlled entry of trucks, conducting of awareness
programs among road users and night patrolling on the Highways should be
undertaken for enhancing safety. Specific observations on the maintenance and
safety aspects have been covered in the next two recommendations.

137

16.

The Committee observe that an undesirable consequence of the expansion

in road network and accompanying motorization in the country is the increase in

the road related accidents and fatalities. From its examination of the matter, the
Committee get the impression that issue of safety is not being given the attention
it deserves. The Government is yet to come up with a National Road Safety
Policy. In spite of the fact that National Road Safety and Traffic Management
Bill, 2010 has already been introduced in Lok Sabha and examined by a
Parliamentary Committee, it is learnt that such a policy is still under
consideration. The Committee firmly believe that the policy representing
Governments commitment as it does, should take precedence over any other
measures, legal or executive, and therefore call upon the Government to expedite
the formulation of National Road Safety Policy. The Committee further desire the
Road safety should be accorded utmost priority with adequate budgetary
provisions and uncluttered decisive commitment towards the cause. The
Committee also note that Ministry has proposed to create a Board for Road
Safety and Traffic Management through Road Safety Bill, 2010. In this
connection, the Committee are aware that the Parliamentary Committee on
Transport, in their 160th Report presented in July, 2010, has recommended for
withdrawal of the said bill. The Committee also agree with their view that the
major problem in the existing framework vis--vis Road Safety, is the existence of
a large number of agencies both at the Centre and State level and lack of
coordination amongst them. The Committee also feel that the proposed Board is
not going to do away with any of the existing agencies and in the name of having

138

an integrated mechanism, the proposal of the Ministry is, in fact, creating yet
another institution adding to the existing ones. Furthermore, the Committee learn
that the proposed Board is merely advisory in nature and it has not been
provided with any explicit statutory role of effecting coordination amongst the
different agencies. The Committee, therefore, emphasize that what is required
first is a National Road Safety Policy to bring about synergy and better
coordination among the already existing Government agencies/ research
organizations and making the system effective, rather than creating another one.
The Committee therefore feel that the Government needs to assess the present
situation in a holistic manner.
As regards road safety, the Committee also observe that availability of
suitable width of land is required to make a highway safe for commuters and that
some States Governments are not cooperating on the issue. In the opinion of the
Committee, holistic perspective that addresses the entire gamut of road safety is
the need of the hour. In their view, convening of regular meetings between the
Chairman, NHAI and the Chief Ministers/Chief Secretaries of the States
concerned, on the significance of requisite land for highways to avoid loss of
lives, could remove bottlenecks and hurdles in the implementation of NHDP.

139

17.

The Committee have been informed that engineering/technical aspects of

Road Safety are being taken care of at the design stage of the National Highway
itself. However, the Committee are pained to note that there are certain sections
of National Highways in different parts of the country, from where recurrence of
fatal accidents has been regularly reported due to their faulty design or such
shortcomings. One such section is near Kooteripattu on NH-45. Since the
inception of this section of highway in 2005, about 700 accidents have already
taken place, killing more than 132 people. The Committee have been raising his
issue for the last one year. Though some tentative action has been reportedly
taken on the matter, yet the Committee are shocked to know that the Ministry of
Road Transport and Highways is still preparing a report on the same. This state
of affairs raises serious doubts about how the sufferings of a common man are
dealt with in the existing set up. The Committee express their profound anguish
over the scant regard that has been shown towards the lives of the people and
strongly deprecate the callous approach of concerned agencies. They also
recommend that road safety issue of Kooteripattu alongwith the complaints of
similar nature from any other section in the entire NH network should be
addressed with utmost urgency. The Committee also recommend that the
Ministry should compulsorily carry out road safety audit for all future projects
either at the planning stage or at the Detailed Project Reports stage. The needs of
the local population living on both sides of such Highways should also be given
due attention in the form of subways, foot overbridges, pedestrian crossings,
service road, underpasses or even realignment of the road, if needed, because no

140

venture, whatever be its utility or commercial viability, should ever compromise

on safety of road users.

141

18.

During their on-the-spot visits to various NH projects in some States, the

Committee observed that in several cases, once a stretch of road was being taken
up for development, there was a sufficient time gap between the handing over of
the road and the actual commencement of the project, and thus, the road
remained neglected in the interregnum. They feel that the issue requires serious
attention. Further, the Committee note that prior to entrustment of National
Highway stretches, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways is solely
responsible for the maintenance and repair of these stretches. Same is being
carried out through State PWDs and Ministry releases the funds for this purpose.
On similar lines, prior to award of civil works for development, NHAI is carrying
out the maintenance & repair work through State PWDs from the funds
allocated/released by Ministry of Road Transport and Highways. However, the
financial position of State PWDs is weak in several States and shortage of funds
leaves no room for road maintenance, hence incessant complaints have been
received about the poor condition of National Highways. The Committee,
therefore, feel that the situation warrants a direct role and intervention on the part
of Ministry. The Committee note that NHAI has now decided to formulate a
Standard Maintenance Manual for improving the maintenance & repair of
highways, which is currently under examination. The Committee feel that such a
manual should have been in place much earlier. They would emphasize that
earnest effort should be made for preventive maintenance rather than
conventional reactive maintenance of roads and highways.

142

The Committee further feel that the Ministry should tighten its supervisory/
monitoring mechanism vis--vis not only PPP projects but also EPC projects. The
Committee are also of the view that provision of the Damages for breach of
maintenance obligation, as recommended by B.K. Chaturvedi Committee,
wherein the authority shall be entitled to recover damages, until the breach is
repaired, should be adhered to religiously. The Committee are of the view that
in respect of EPC contracts, DLP(Defect Liability Period), which was just one
year till recent times, was utterly insufficient. Though, the Ministry has amended
it to three years, still the Committee feel that incorporation of 5 years inbuilt
maintenance clause in all construction contracts, on the lines of Pradhan Mantri
Gram Sadak Yojna (PMGSY), is essential for the efficiency of Highway projects.
The Committee, therefore, recommend that the Ministry should now initiate
efforts in this regard at the earliest after consulting the Ministry of Finance, for
the projects due to be undertaken in the 12th Plan period. The Committee are also
of the opinion that since the responsibility of maintenance under PPP is that of
the concessionaire and the period can vary from 12 to 30 years, more projects
under PPP should be encouraged as this will not only reduce the financial burden
on the Government but will also be in public interest.

143

19.

The Committee note that many concessionaires of highway projects have

been appointing sub-contractors on Engineering, Procurement and Construction

(EPC) basis despite lack of experience and technical qualifications on their part,
which not only affects the quality and safety aspects of National Highways but
also jeopardizes timely completion of projects. The Committee also note certain
complaints that policies followed by the Ministry of Road Transport and
Highways tend to favour large contractors, who eventually sub-contract the
project. The Committee, even while acknowledging the fact that experience of
Ministry has not been very good with small/medium level contractors, are not
convinced with the merit of Ministrys approach and feel that promotion and
encouragement of Medium level contractors will not only strengthen our
capacity vis--vis road construction but also provide much needed exposure to
our nascent construction industry. Moreover, the present contractors are,
anyway, sub-contracting the major portion either with or without the consent of
Ministry. Hence an initiative to involve medium level contractors will bring them
under direct control of Ministry and NHAI and make them more accountable. The
Committee are aware of certain changes introduced in the RFQ & RFP documents
to curtail subcontracting, but feel that complete procedure need to be further
streamlined and regularized with the provision of strict supervision, so that the
project works do not suffer due to the appointment of substandard EPC
contractors.
The Committee further observe that during 2008-09, when low response of
market was witnessed, certain changes were introduced in the RFQ/RFP and MCA

144

on the recommendations of B.K. Chaturvedi Committee. However, now when

market is buoyant and giving good responses to the bidding process, the
Ministry has been arguing about probability of suboptimal bids being tendered.
The Committee find such an approach completely confusing. The Committee
strongly urge the Ministry to desist from such knee-jerk reactions and seek
expert opinion so as to adopt a long-term consistent policy.

145

20.

An important reason, which the Committee note for causing delays in

several Highway projects is the delay in obtaining necessary clearance under the
Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and local laws for cutting of trees and diversion of
forest areas as well as the wildlife clearance all being time consuming
processes. The Committee have been informed by Ministry that as regards
environmental clearance, they are depositing the compensatory afforestation
amount for trees being cut for a highway with the Ministry of Environment. The
Committee also take note of the argument put forth by the Ministry that planting
trees close to the road is no longer relevant in the absence of bullock carts now
and thus is only a major traffic hazard and that on this point there is a difference
in viewpoints of both the Ministries. The Committee are of the view that central
nodal institutions like Ministry of Road Transport and Highways and NHAI, being
mandated to construct, develop and maintain the National Highways throughout
the country can certainly play a more proactive role and therefore, strongly
recommend that the Ministry, in coordination with Ministry of Environment and
Forest, should devise a mutually agreed formula for time-bound clearances of the
highway projects. The Committee also desire that Ministry should pursue with the
Ministry of Environment and Forest vigorously to get preferential treatment for
the National highways, similar to certain coal-mining projects, keeping in mind
their significance for the progress of the nation. The Committee further counsel
the Ministry that the process of obtaining environmental clearances should be
initiated at the earliest possible stage and clearances should be obtained before
finalizing the cost or awarding the project and not vice-versa.

146

The Committee also came across a peculiar case concerning the highway
project of NH-24 i.e. Hapur to Garmukteshwar (total length 35 km), where the
Ministry of Environment and Forest has not been able to give environmental
clearances because they are looking forward for the recommendation of State
Wildlife Board. And since, State Wildlife Board has not yet been constituted, the
project is lying in doldrums. Similarly, a project in Gwalior is being held-up for the
last eight years due to non-cooperation of the Army to hand-over one acre of
land.

The Committee strongly believe that procedures entangled in the

bureaucratic cow-web are not going to help the issue and therefore, recommend
that all concerned parties should follow a pragmatic approach towards solving
issues of these nature. They suggest that the Ministry should take up the matter
with the Ministry of Defence, the concerned State Governments as well as the
Ministry of Environment & Forest urgently to ensure clearance and timely
completion of this highway project.

147

21.

The Committee note with distress that development and completion of

some of the Port Connectivity Projects are not getting due attention. Mormugao
Port Connectivity project, Chennai-Ennore Port Connectivity project as well as
Haldia Port Connectivity project have been getting delayed on one account or the
other. In respect of Mormugao Port Connectivity project, the Committee are
constrained to note that due to certain issues such as acquisition of Government
land (presently 1.18 km stretch of road is still to be acquired) and due to
encroachment problems, Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) and Government of Goa are
at loggerheads and project is suffering. The Committee, during their visit to Goa,
were pained to note that several areas of disagreement existed between MPT and
Government of Goa. The matter is sub-judice currently. The Committee hope that
the matter would be resolved soon. With regard to connectivity project involving
the Chennai & Ennore Ports, the Committee are disturbed to note that bidding for
the same is being held up due to lack of clear commitment from all stakeholders
for equity/debt-contribution as well as shifting of 1800 PAPs (Project Affected
Parties) from Ennore Expressway. The Committee, therefore, suggest that
Ministry should make concerted efforts through all channels possible and ensure
cooperation among all stakeholders in order to expedite implementation of these
Port Connectivity Projects.

148

22.

The Committee note that the development of roads and highways in the

North-Eastern region is not at par with the rest of the country, because progress
achieved in respect of awarded NHDP projects in the region is rather dismal. For
instance, in respect of the projects in Assam under East-West corridor (NHDP
phase-II), zero progress has been shown in 8 projects as on 31.08.2010. The
Committee find that the situation is more alarming because most of these
projects have already crossed the date of completion as per original contracts.
Even the

inception of new

programme

viz.

Special

Accelerated Road

Development Programme for North-Eastern Region (SARDP-NE) has not led to

any substantial progress. The examination of Budget Estimates and Expenditure
for the year 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011 furnished by the Ministry, revealed a
sorry picture of actual expenditure too. To cite an example, in the current year i.e.
2010-11, out of the Budget Estimates of Rs. 1500 cr. for SARDP-NE, only Rs.
553.36 cr. have been utilized upto 28th February, 2011. Apart from the adverse law
and order situation, the Committee also note that in certain States, where the
process of land acquisition is rather slow, the Ministry of Road Transport and
Highways is mulling over a proposal to leave those States out of the roadbuilding loop. The Committee feel that such an approach will only add to the
already imbalanced development of roads and highways in NE States. The
Committee are of view that special situations/circumstances require special effort
and endeavour, which is completely lacking on part of the Ministry and NHAI. The
Committee, therefore, urge the Ministry to give due attention to Highway projects
in NE region, as these National Highways play a vital role in providing

149

connectivity to these regions in the absence of proper rail and air connectivity
and act as the lifeline of the people. The Committee also suggest that Ministry
and NHAI should undertake a coherent and coordinated effort with active and
effective cooperation of the Ministry of Home Affairs and the State Governments
of NE region to remove bottlenecks in their Highway projects.

150

23.

The Committee note that Government has formulated a scheme to improve

the road connectivity in the Left Wing Extremism (LWE) affected areas covering
33 districts in eight States. However, the Committee are dismayed to find that
funds allocated for this purpose are grossly underutilized. During the year 20092010, out of Budget Estimates of ` 500 cr and Revised Estimates for ` 125 cr, only
` 5 cr could be utilized. Even for the year 2010-11, out of Budget Estimates of `
1000 cr; only ` 578.21 cr have been utilized upto 28th February, 2011, which is
quite unsatisfactory.

The Ministry has attributed such underutilization to late

awarding of projects. Considering the importance of this scheme for economic

development

of

LWE

affected

areas,

reducing

economic

isolation

and

strengthening political cohesion, the Committee desire that a high level group
comprising of representatives of Ministries of Home, Urban Development,
Development of North Eastern Region (DONER) and the Ministry of Road
Transport & Highways (MORTH) and National Highways Authority of India (NHAI)
should be formed, who should be entrusted with the responsibility to
supervise/monitor the programme on a regular basis to ensure that funds are
utilized prudently and required infrastructure is created for the common good.
The Committee would particularly emphasize upon the fact that the Ministry
needs to coordinate effectively with the Ministry of Home Affairs and concerned
State Governments to tackle the disruption of works by extremists and for
successful implementation of this project.
The Committee further note that Left Wing Extremism is, to a large extent,
funded out of the extortion/concession, which the extremists get from many

151

Government contractors. All this make the entire development strategy counterproductive and self-defeating. The Committee, therefore, recommend that
credentials of contractors of LWE affected areas should be verified with help from
Ministry of Home Affairs and concerned State Governments in order to stop the
diversion of funds in the hands of unscrupulous elements.

NEW DELHI;
26 April, 2011
Vaisakha 6 ,1933(S)

FRANCISCO SARDINHA,
CHAIRMAN,
COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES

152

Annexure I
Allocation and expenditure under of important schemes

of the Department of Road Transport & Highways during the year 2007-08

Sl No

Name of the scheme

Budget (Original)
Estimates

Revised
Estimates

1
1

2
EAP NHAI
a) Externally Aided (NHAI)
b) Loan to NHAI
Sub-total EAP NHAI
a) National Highways (original) - including Rs 200.24 crore
re-appropriated from MH 4552 for
NE States
b) Travel Expenses (Rs. 1.39 crore) c) Machinery &
equipment (Rs. 38.25 crores) (including Rs 5.00 crore for
NE States)
a) Works under BRDB - Other than NER
b) Works under BRDB - NER
Sub-total - BRDB
Other charges
Development of information technology
a) Strategic roads under BRDB NER
b) Strategic roads Other than NER
Sub-total Strategic roads
R&D Planning studies
Professional Organisation (Rs. 1.00 crore)/ Training (Rs.
0.50 crore)
Charged expenditure
NHAI (investment)
E&I for States from CRF (including Rs.41.00 crore for
POSCO, Orissa and Mughal Road in J&K.
E&I for UTs from CRF
a) SARDP-NE - BRDB
b) SARDP-NE - - RPAO, Guwahati
c) SARDP-NE NHAI
Sub-total SARDP
Total

4
5
6

7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Variations
Variations
Actual
Reasons for
Expenditure as between Col. 3 & between Col. 4 variations
4 Excess (+)
& 5 Excess (+) under Col. 6
on 31.03.09
Savings (-)
Savings (-)
6

1788.8
447.2
2236
2079.25

1776
444
2220
2028.64

1776
444
2220
2011.07

349.76
150
499.76
0.5
9.5
7
67
74
8.5
1.5

449.76
200
649.76
0.5
2.75
7
67
74
1.86
1.5

423.93
200
623.93
0.5
0.32
6.35
61.45
67.8
0.2
0.35

6
6541.06
264.93

6
6541.06
205.93

5.93
6541.06
169.7

9
250
150
0
710
12440

9
270
146
294
710
12451

1.6
270
134.02
294
698.02
12339.92

*NOTE : Does not include Rs.60.00 crore (RE Rs.49.00 crore) for Road Transport & Rs.2090.00 crore as IEBR.

7
-12.8
-3.2
-16

8
0 As per actual
0 As per actual
0

-50.61
100
50
150
0
-6.75
0
0
0
-6.64

-17.57
-25.83
0
-25.83
0
-2.43
-0.65
-5.55
-6.2
-1.66

0
0
0

-1.15
-0.07
0

-59
0
20
-4
294
0
11

-36.23
-7.4
0
-11.98
0
-11.98
-111.08

(Rs in crores)
Reasons for
variations
under Col. 7
9
-

As allocated
As allocated
As allocated

As per actual
As per actual
-

As per actual
-

As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

As per actual

As per actual

As per actual
As per actual
-

As allocated
As per actual
As per actual
As per demand
As allocated
As per actual
As per demand
-

Allocation and expenditure of important schemes (not included in the Annual Plan) of the Department of Road Transport & Highways (Roads Wing) during the
year 2007-08
Sl No

Name of the scheme

Budget (Original)
Estimates

Revised
Estimates

1
1

2
CRF for States
CRF for Delhi
CRF for Pondicherry
CRF for A&N Islands
CRF for Chandigarh
CRF for Dadra & Nagar Haveli
CRF for Daman & Diu
CRF for Lakshadweep
Sub-total - CRF
Maintenance and repairs of National Highways - Roads
Wing
Maintenance and repairs of National Highways entrusted to
Border Roads Wing
NH Tribunals
NH Administration - other charges
Equipment & Machinery (Non-Plan)
Permanent International Association of Road Congress,
Paris (PIARC)
Works financed from Permanent Bridge Fee Fund
Cost of collection of fee payable to States
Grants for development of State roads from GBS
Total

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Variations
Variations
Actual
Reasons for
Expenditure as between Col. 3 & between Col. 4 variations
4 Excess (+)
& 5 Excess (+) under Col. 6
on 31.03.09
Savings (-)
Savings (-)

1511.45
44.69
3.67
1.9
2.28
1.1
0.79
0.12
1566
794.32

1511.45
44.69
3.67
1.9
2.28
1.1
0.79
0.12
1566
971.62

5
1312.19
9.5
0
0.5
0
0
0
0
1322.19
952.64

20.06

30.06

28.71

1.9
1
1.54
0.05

1.9
1
1.54
0.05

0.2
0.07
0.2
0.04

90
0.5
0.68
2476.05

90
0.5
0.68
2663.35

61.57
0
0.52
2366.14

6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
177.3
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
187.3

7
-199.26
-35.19
-3.67
-1.4
-2.28
-1.1
-0.79
-0.12
-243.81

8
-

(Rs in crores)
Reasons for
variations
under Col. 7

9
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

-18.98 As per demand As per actual

-1.35 As per demand
-1.7
-0.93
-1.34
-0.01
-28.43
-0.5
-0.16
-297.21

As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

Annexure II
Allocation and expenditure under of important schemes

of the Department of Road Transport & Highways during the year 2008-09

Sl No

Name of the scheme

Budget (Original)
Estimates

Revised
Estimates

Variations
Variations
Actual
Reasons for
Expenditure as between Col. 3 & between Col. 4 variations
4 Excess (+)
& 5 Excess (+) under Col. 6
on 31.03.09
Savings (-)
Savings (-)
5

(Rs in crores)
Reasons for
variations
under Col. 7

EAP NHAI
a) Externally Aided (NHAI)
1515.00
1515.00
b) Loan to NHAI
379.00
379.00
Sub-total EAP NHAI
1894.00
1894.00
2
2142.79
2853.74
a) National Highways (original) including
2.00
2.00
b) Travel Expenses (Rs. 2.00 crore)
10.00
4.05
c) Machinery & equipment (Rs.10.00 crore)
Sub-total - NH(O)
2154.79
2859.79
3
Rail-cum-Road bridge, Munger, Bihar
40.00
40.00
4
650.00
650.00
Works under BRDB
5
Other charges
0.50
0.50
6
Development of information technology
3.50
3.50
7
78.00
78.00
BRDB - Strategic Roads
8
R&D Planning studies
8.50
3.50
9
Professional Organisation (Rs. 1.00 crore)/
1.50
1.50
Training (Rs. 0.50 crore)
10
Charged expenditure
6.00
6.00
11
NHAI (investment)
6972.47
6972.47
12
a) E&I for States from CRF
175.74
175.74
b) E&I - POSCO
40.00
40.00
c) E&I - Mughal Road
30.00
30.00
d) E&I - Sansari Nulla Killer
5.00
5.00
13
e) E&I for UTs from CRF
10.00
10.00
Sub-total - E&I
260.74
260.74
14
700.00
500.00
a) SARDP-NE - BRDB
b) SARDP-NE - RPAO, Guwahati
400.00
400.00
c) SARDP-NE Not allocated
100.00
100.00
SARDP-NE
1200.00
1000.00
Grand Total
13270.00
13770.00
*Rs.500.00 crore additional fund provided under NH(O) through 2nd Batch of supplementary.

1515.00
379.00
1894.00
2852.70
1.24
3.07
2857.01
40.00
645.80
0.13
0.71
76.96
0.71
0.16
2.07
6972.47
175.65
40.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
215.65
398.11
245.61
0.00
643.72
13349.39

0.00
0.00
0.00
710.95
0.00
-5.95
705.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-200.00
0.00
0.00
-200.00
500.00

0.00
0.00
0.00
-1.04
-0.76
-0.98
-2.78
0.00
-4.20
-0.37
-2.79
-1.04
-2.79

As per demand As per actual

As per actual
As allocated
As per actual
As allocated

As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

-1.34
-3.93
0.00
-0.09
0.00
-30.00
-5.00
-10.00
-45.09
-101.89 As allocated
-154.39
-100.00
-356.28
-420.61

As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

Allocation and expenditure under of important schemes (not included in the Annual Plan) of the Department of Road Transport & Highways during the year 200809
Sl No

1
1

Name of the scheme

Budget (Original)
Estimates

2
3
CRF for States*
1605.82
CRF for Delhi
48.45
CRF for Pondicherry
7.59
CRF for A&N Islands
3.27
CRF for Chandigarh
3.51
CRF for Dadra & Nagar Haveli
1.64
CRF for Daman & Diu
1.24
CRF for Lakshadweep
0.12
Sub-total - CRF
1671.64
2
Maintenance and repairs of National Highways
792.03
- Roads Wing** &
3
Maintenance and repairs of National Highways
26.35
entrusted to Border Roads Wing
4
NH Tribunals
2.40
5
NH Administration - other charges
2.50
6
Equipment & Machinery (Non-Plan)
2.00
7
Permanent International Association of Road
0.05
Congress, Paris (PIARC)
8
Works financed from Permanent Bridge Fee
90.00
Fund
9
Cost of collection of fee payable to States
0.50
Total=
2587.47
* Rs.500.00 crore provided under CRF for States under 2nd Batch of supplementary
**Rs.155.94 crore provided under M&R for Road Wing through at RE stage.
& Expenditure provisional subject to final adjusment with States

Revised
Estimates

Variations
Variations
Actual
Reasons for
Expenditure as between Col. 3 & between Col. 4 variations
4 Excess (+)
& 5 Excess (+) under Col. 6
on 31.03.09
Savings (-)
Savings (-)

2105.82
48.45
7.59
3.27
3.51
1.64
1.24
0.12
2171.64
947.97

5
2072.98
41.29
6.56
0.00
1.17
0.00
0.00
0.00
2122.00
947.77

26.00

21.68

2.40
2.50
2.00
0.05

0.44
0.02
0.14
0.05

90.00

68.71

0.50
3243.06

0.00
3160.81

7
500.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
500.00
155.94
-0.35
0.00
0.00
0.00

8
-32.84 As per demand
-7.16
-1.03
-3.27
-2.34
-1.64
-1.24
-0.12
-49.64

Reasons for
variations
under Col. 7

9
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

-0.20 As per demand As per actual

-4.32 As allocated
-1.96
-2.48
-1.86
-

0.00

0.00

0.00
0.00
655.59

-21.29
-0.50
-82.25

As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

Annexure III
Allocation and expenditure of important schemes (included in the Annual Plan) of the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways during the financial year 2009-10
(Rs in crores)
Sl No
Name of the scheme
Budget
Revised
Variations Variations Reasons for
Actual
Reasons for
(Original)
Estimates
between variations
Expenditure between Col.
variations under
Estimates
3 & 4 Excess Col. 4 & 5 under Col. 6
as on
Col. 7
(+) Savings (- Excess (+)
31.03.10
)
Savings (-)
1
1

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

15

2
EAP NHAI
a) Externally Aided (NHAI)
b) Loan to NHAI
Sub-total EAP NHAI
a) National Highways (original) Works (Rs.4029.55 + Rs.313.00
from MH 4552) (52.00 crore as additional from MH-4552 , 103
crore supplementary grant and 845 crore by re-appropriation =
Rs.1000 crore)
b) Travel Expenses (Rs. 2.00 crore)
c) Machinery & equipment (Rs.15.00 crore)
Sub-total - Other Schemes
Funds for National Highways in Naxalite affected area
Rail-cum-Road bridge, Munger, Bihar
Development of Vijayawada-Ranchi Road
Works under BRDB (Rs.706.00+Rs.50.00 from MH 4552)
Other charges
Development of information technology
BRDB - Strategic Roads
R&D Planning studies
Professional Organisation (Rs. 1.00 crore)/ Training (Rs. 0.50
crore)
Charged expenditure
NHAI (investment)
a) E&I for States from CRF
b) E&I - POSCO
c) E&I - Mughal Road
d) E&I - Sansari Nulla Killer
e) E&I for UTs from CRF
Sub-total - E&I
a) SARDP-NE to BRDB
a) SARDP-NE to RPAO, Guwhati
b) SARDP - Other Admn. Expenses
c) SARDP- Not allocated
SARDP-NE

272.00
68.00
340.00
3342.55

272.00
68.00
340.00
4342.55

272.00
68.00
340.00
4298.12

2.00
15.00
3359.55
500.00
60.00
200.00
600.00

2.00
15.00
4359.55
125.00
60.00
20.00
756.00

1.20
0.53
4299.85
5.00
60.00
0.00
723.49

0.50
3.50
60.00
5.50
1.50

0.50
3.50
100.00
4.50
1.50

0.00
3.05
82.17
3.84
0.39

6.00
8578.45
213.97
30.00
20.00
3.00
16.03
283.00
700.00
490.00
10.00
0.00
1200.00

6.00
7404.70
184.67
30.00
20.00
3.00
13.83
251.50
700.00
490.00
10.00
0.00
1200.00

5.32
7404.70
104.35
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
104.35
380.91
277.60
0.04
0.00
658.55

7
0.00
0.00
0.00

0.00
0.00
0.00

1000.00
0.00
0.00
1000.00
-375.00
0.00
-180.00

-44.43 As per demand

-0.80
-14.47
-59.70
-120.00 As allocated
0.00
-20.00 As allocated

As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

156.00
0.00
0.00
40.00
-1.00

-32.51 As per demand

-0.50
-0.45
-17.83 As per demand
-0.66 As allocated

As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

0.00
0.00
-1173.75
-29.30
0.00
0.00
0.00
-2.20
-31.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

-1.11
-0.68
0.00 As allocated
-80.32 As allocated
-30.00
-20.00
-3.00
-13.83 As allocated
-147.15
-319.09
-212.40
-9.96
0.00
-541.45

As per actual
As per actual

As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
-

Sl No

Name of the scheme

Budget
(Original)
Estimates

Revised
Estimates

Variations
Actual
Expenditure between Col.
3 & 4 Excess
as on
(+) Savings (31.03.10
)

Variations Reasons for

between variations
Col. 4 & 5 under Col. 6
Excess (+)
Savings (-)

Reasons for
variations under
Col. 7

-565.25
-942.04
Grand Total
15198.00
14632.75
13690.71
Allocation and expenditure of important schemes (not included in the Annual Plan) of the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways during the year 2009-10
Sl No

Name of the scheme

Budget
(Original)
Estimates

Revised
Estimates

CRF for States

CRF for Delhi
CRF for Pondicherry
CRF for A&N Islands
CRF for Chandigarh
CRF for Dadra & Nagar Haveli
CRF for Daman & Diu
CRF for Lakshadweep
Sub-total - CRF
Maintenance and repairs of National Highways - Roads Wing
Maintenance and repairs of National Highways entrusted to
Border Roads Wing
NH Tribunals
NH Administration - other charges
Equipment & Machinery (Non-Plan)
Permanent International Association of Road Congress, Paris
(PIARC)
Works financed from Permanent Bridge Fee Fund
Cost of collection of fee payable to States
Total

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Variations
Actual
Expenditure between Col.
3 & 4 Excess
as on
(+) Savings (31.03.10
)

Variations Reasons for

between variations
Col. 4 & 5 under Col. 6
Excess (+)
Savings (-)

-272.34
-8.22
-1.29
-0.55
-0.59
-0.28
-0.21
-0.02
-283.50
-1.34

-375.95
-51.78
-8.11
-2.29
-0.56
-1.43
-1.33
-0.13
-441.58
-77.61

1988.55
60.00
9.40
4.05
4.34
2.03
1.54
0.15
2070.06
1036.44
24.00

1716.21
51.78
8.11
3.50
3.75
1.75
1.33
0.13
1786.56
1035.10
24.00

1340.26
0.00
0.00
1.21
3.19
0.32
0.00
0.00
1344.98
957.49
23.73

2.40
2.50
2.00
0.06

0.91
0.83
0.50
0.06

0.03
0.02
0.00
0.00

90.00
0.50
3227.96

90.00
0.50
2938.46

89.95
0.01
2416.21

0.00
-1.49
-1.67
-1.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
-289.50

Reasons for
variations under
Col. 7

As allocated
As allocated
As allocated
As allocated
As allocated
As allocated
As allocated
As allocated

As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

As allocated

As per actual

-0.27
-0.88 As allocated
-0.81 As allocated
-0.50 As allocated

As per actual
As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

-0.06
-0.05
-0.49
-522.25

As per actual
As per actual
As per actual

Annexure IV
List of Under Implementation Projects

S.No.

stretch

NH No

Total
Length
(In Km)

Completed
Length
(In Km)

Funded
By

TPC
(Rs.Cr.)

Date of
Start

Date of
completion as
per contract

Date of
Completion
anticipated

Armur to Kadloor Yellareddy

(NS-2/AP-1)
(Approved Length 60.25)

59

11.9

BOT

390.56

Feb2010

Feb-2012

Feb-2012

Gundla Pochampalli to
Bowenpalli Shivarampalli to
Thondapalli (NS-23/AP)

23.1

16.2

NHAI

71.57

Dec2005

Dec-2006

Mar-2011

Hyderabad-Vijayawada

181.63

BOT

1740

Apr2010

Oct-2012

Oct-2012

Cuddapah-Mydukur-Kurnool

18

188.752

BOT

1585

Aug2010

Feb-2013

Feb-2013

Six Laning of NelloreChilkaluripet

183.52

BOT

1535

Concession agreement signed in July

2010

Hyderabad-Yadgiri (Approved
Length 30)

202

35.65

13.05

BOT

388

Aug2010

May-2012

May-2012

Chilkaluripet - Vijayawada (Six

lane)

82.5

11

BOT

572.3

May2009

Oct-2011

Oct-2011

Maibang to Lumding (AS-25)

54

28

NHAI

385.13

Oct2006

Apr-2009

Dec-2013

Maibang to Lumding (AS-26)

54

23

NHAI

167.64

May2006

Nov-2008

Dec-2013

10

Lanka to Daboka (AS-16)

54

24

24

NHAI

225

Dec2005

Jun-2008

Mar-2011

11

Harangajo to Maibang (AS-23)

54

16

6.75

NHAI

280

Aug2006

Feb-2009

Dec-2011

12

Nalbari to Bijni (AS-8)

31

30

26.65

NHAI

200

Dec2005

Jun-2008

Mar-2011

13

Maibang to Lumding (AS-24)

54

15

NHAI

280.13

May2006

Nov-2008

Dec-2013

14

Nalbari to Bijni (AS-6)

31

25

13

NHAI

225

Nov2005

Jun-2009

Dec-2011

15

Maibang to Lumding (AS-27)

54

21

NHAI

200

Oct2006

Apr-2009

Dec-2011

16

Guwahati to Nalbari (AS-4)

31

28

NHAI

175.96

Dec2005

Apr-2008

Mar-2012

17

Nalbari to Bijni (AS-7)

31

27.3

NHAI

208

Oct2005

Apr-2008

Dec-2011

18

Brahmputra Bridge (AS-28)

31

NHAI

217.61

Oct2006

Apr-2010

Mar-2012

19

Bijni to Assam/WB Border (AS11)

31C

30

0.5

NHAI

195

Nov2005

Jun-2008

Dec-2011

20

Nalbari to Bijni (AS-9)

31

21.5

19.105

NHAI

142

Dec2005

Jun-2008

Dec-2011

21

Lumding to Daboka (AS-15)

54

18.5

10.7

NHAI

130

Feb2008

Aug-2010

Dec-2011

22

Bijni to Assam/WB Border (AS12)

31C

30

16.62

NHAI

230

Nov2005

Jun-2008

Dec-2011

23

Bijni to Assam/WB Border (AS10)

31C

33

10.1

NHAI

237.8

Nov2005

Jun-2008

Dec-2011

24

Harangajo to Maibang (AS-22)

54

24

NHAI

196

Jan2007

Jul-2009

Dec-2013

25

Silchar-Udarband (AS-1)

54

32

12.5

NHAI

154.57

Sep2004

Sep-2007

Mar-2011

26

Nagaon to Dharmatul (AS-2)

37

25

12

NHAI

264.72

Dec2005

Jun-2008

Dec-2011

27

Guwahati to Nalbari (AS-5)

31

28

11.5

NHAI

198.16

Oct2005

Apr-2008

Mar-2012

28

Nagaon bypass (AS-18)

37

23

22.185

NHAI

230

Dec2005

Jun-2008

Apr-2011

29

Sonapur to Guwahati (AS-3)

37

19

14

NHAI

245

Sep2005

Jun-2009

Dec-2011

30

Dharamtul to Sonapur (AS-20)

37

22

NHAI

160

Nov2005

May-2008

Dec-2011

31

Dharamtul to Sonapur (AS-19)

37

25

14.602

NHAI

200

Dec2005

Jun-2008

Dec-2011

32

Daboka to Nagaon (AS-17)

36

30.5

23.415

NHAI

225

Dec2005

Jun-2008

Oct-2011

33

Harangajo to Maibang (AS-21)

54

26

NHAI

212

Jan2007

Jul-2009

Dec-2013

34

Kotwa to Dewapur (LMNHP-10)

28

38

33

WB

240

Nov2005

Nov-2008

Mar-2011

35

Deewapur to UP/Bihar Border

(LMNHP-9)

28

41.085

WB

300

Nov2005

Oct-2008

Jun-2012

36

Simrahi to Ring bund (missing

link) (BR-4)

57

15.15

13.36

NHAI

100.5

Apr2006

Apr-2008

Jun-2011

37

2 Laning of MokamaMunger(Approved Length 70

Km)

80

69.27

Annuity

351.54

Concession Agreement signed in July

2010

38

2 Laning of ForbesganjJogwani(Approved Length 13

Km)

57A

9.258

Annuity

73.55

Concession Agreement signed in July

2010

39

Patna - Bakhtiarpur

30

50.6

BOT

574

LOA issued in Dec 2010

40

Kosi Bridge including

approaches and Guide Bond &
Afflux Bond (BR-5)

57

10.63

Annuity

418.04

Apr2007

Apr-2010

Jun-2011

41

Ring bunds to Jhanjharpur (BR6)

57

38.55

35.6

NHAI

340

Jan2006

Jun-2008

Mar-2011

42

Jhanjhapur to Darbanga (BR-7)

57

37.59

22

NHAI

340

Apr2006

Sep-2008

Dec-2011

43

Darbanga to Muzzaffarpur (BR9)

57

37.75

37.75

NHAI

291.8

Jan2006

Jun-2008

Feb-2011

44

Muzzaffarpur to Mehsi (LMNHP12)

28

40

37

WB

275

Sep2005

Sep-2008

Mar-2011

45

Mehsi to Kotwa (LMNHP-11)

28

40

37

WB

239

Sep2005

Sep-2008

Mar-2011

46

Forbesganj-Simrahi (BR-3)

57

34.87

13.5

NHAI

332.94

Apr2006

Sep-2008

Jun-2011

47

2 Laning of Muzaffarpur Sonbarsa(Approved Length 89

Km)

77

86

Annuity

511.54

48

Darbanga to Muzzaffarpur (BR8)

57

32.05

31.75

NHAI

305

49

Motihari-Raxaul (Approved
Length 67 Km)

28A

68.79

BOT

375.09

50

Patna- Muzzaffarpur

19 &
77

63

Annuity

671.3

May
2010

Nov 2012

Nov 2012

51

Purnea - Gayakota (EW-12/BR)

31

28

26.41

NHAI

205.73

Sep2001

Sep-2004

Mar-2011

52

4 Laning of ChappraHajipur(Approved Length 153

Km)

19

65

Annuity

575

LOA issued in Jul 2010

Jan2006

Jun-2008

Nov-2011

LOA issued in Jan 2011

LOA issued May 2010

53

Varanasi-Aurangabad

192.4

BOT

2848

LOA issued Apr 2010

54

End of Durg Bypass Chattisgarh / Maharashtra

Border

82.685

77.3

BOT

464

Jan2008

Jan-2011

Apr-2011

55

Aurang - Raipur

43.485

40.7

BOT

190

Apr2006

Jan-2009

Mar-2011

56

Eight laning of Haryana/ Delhi

Border to Mukaraba Chowk
(NS-18/DL)

12.9

12.9

NHAI

87.89

Jun2009

Sep-2010

Mar-2011

57

Panji-Goa/Karnatka Border

4A

69

BOT

471

Agreement signed in Feb 2010

58

4/6 Laning of Maharastra/Goa

Border - Panaji Goa/KNT
Border

17

139

BOT

1872

Agreement signed in July 2010

59

4 Laning of Ahmedabad to
Godhara (Approved Length 210
Km)

59

117.6

BOT

1008.5

Agreement signed in Mar 2010

60

4 Laning of Godhara to Gujarat

/MP Border(Approved Length
210 Km)

59

87.285

BOT

785.5

Agreement signed in Feb 2010

61

Samaikhiali-Gandhidham

8A

56.16

BOT

805.39

Sep-10

Mar-13

Mar-13

62

Kandla - Mundra Port(Approved

Length 73 Km)

8A

71.4

BOT

953.88

Concession agreement signed in March

2010

63

4 laning of Jetpur-Somnath
section of NH-8D (approved
length 127.6)

8D

123.45

BOT

828

LOA issued in Sept 2010

64

Gujarat/Maharashtra BorderSurat - Hazira Port Section

132.9

4.93

BOT

1509.1

Mar2010

Sep-2012

Oct-2012

65

Gagodhar to Garamore
(Package-IV)

15, 8A

90.3

87.5

ADB

479.54

Feb2005

Nov-2007

Mar-2011

66

Surat - Dahisar (Six lane)

239

134.455

BOT

1693.75

Feb2009

Aug-2011

Aug-2011

67

Rohtak - Bawal(Approved
Length 97 Km)

71

82.553

BOT

650

68

Delhi/Haryana Border to
Rohtak

10

63.49

40.66

BOT

486

69

Panipat - Rohtak(Approved
Length 73 Km)

71A

80.858

BOT

807

70

Panipat - Jalandhar (Six lane)

291

103.5

BOT

2288

LOA issued in Feb 2010

May2008

May-2010

May-2011

LOA issued in Jan 2010

May2009

May-2011

Nov-2011

71

Zirakpur - Parwanoo

22

28.69

16.5

BOT

295

Feb2008

Aug-2010

May-2011

72

Gurgaon - Kotputli - Jaipur (Six

lane)

225.6

65

BOT

1673.7

Apr2009

Oct-2011

Jun-2012

73

Delhi - Agra(Approved Length

180.3 Km)

179.5

BOT

1928.22

74

Chenani-Nashri

1A

12

Annuity

2159

Jun2010

Jun-2015

Jul-2015

75

Vijaypur to Pathankot (NS35/J&K)

1A

30

25.85

NHAI

193.1

Sep2005

Feb-2008

Jun-2011

76

Vijaypur to Pathankot (NS34/J&K)

1A

33.65

27.95

NHAI

166.3

Sep2005

Feb-2008

Jun-2011

77

Jammu - Udhampur

1A

65

Annuity

1813.76

Jul2010

Jul-2013

Jul-2013

78

Jammu to Kunjwani (Jammu

Bypass) NS-33/J&K

1A

15

14.7

NHAI

85.34

Nov2005

May-2008

Mar-2011

79

Kunjwani to Vijaypur (NS15/J&K)

1A

17.2

17

NHAI

110

Jan2002

Dec-2004

Mar-2011

LOA issued May 2010

80

Srinagar Bypass (Bridge

Portion) (NS-30A)

1A

1.23

NHAI

62.96

Jun2006

Dec-2008

Dec-2011

81

Quazigund-Banihal

1A

15.25

Annuity

1987

Jul2010

Jul-2015

Jul-2015

82

Srinagar to Banihal

1A

67.76

Annuity

1100.7

83

Hazaribagh-Ranchi

33

75

Annuity

625.07

84

4 Laning of Barhi Hazaribagh(Approved Length

40 Km)

33

41.314

BOT

398

85

Chitradurga -Tumkur
Bypass(Approved Length 145
Km)

114

BOT

839

Mar2011

Aug-2013

Aug-2013

86

Neelamangala Junction on NH
4 with NH 48 to Devihalli

48

81

77.5

BOT

441

Jan2008

Jul-2010

Mar-2011

87

Belgaum-Dharwad(Approved
Length 111 Km)

80

BOT

480

Dec2010

Jun-2013

Jun-2013

88

Banglore-Hoskote-Mudbagal
Section

79.724

79.6

BOT

565

Jan2008

Jul-2010

Mar-2011

LoA issued in Sept 2010

Aug2010

Jan-2013

Jan-2013

LOA issued May 2010

89

Hungund-Hospet (Approved
Length 194 Km)

13

97.89

BOT

946

Sep2010

Mar-2013

Mar-2013

90

Haveri - Harihar

56

56

NHAI

196.65

Nov2008

Jul-2010

Mar-2011

91

Upgradation of HyderabadBangalore Section

22.12

BOT

680

Nov2010

Nov-2012

Nov-2012

92

Devihalli-Hassan(Approved
Length 73 Km)

48

77.23

BOT

453

Dec2010

May-2013

May-2013

93

Harihar - Chitradurga

77

77

NHAI

207.56

Oct2008

Jun-2010

Mar-2011

94

Bijapur - Hungund Section

(Approved Length 194 Km)

13

97.22

BOT

748

Sep2010

Sep-2010

Mar-2013

95

Kundapur-Surathkal &
Mangalore-KNT/Kerala Border

17

90

BOT

671

Sep2010

Mar-2013

Mar-2013

96

New Mangalore Port

13, 17
& 48

37

35.31

SPV

196.5

Jun2005

Dec-2007

Mar-2011

4A

81.89

BOT

359

Mar2011

Sep-2013

Sep-2013

97

4 Laning of Belgaum-Khanpur
Section(Km 0.00 to Km 30.00)
and 2 Laning with paved
sholuders of khanpur-Knt/Goa
border.(Km 30.00 to Km 84.120)

Sep2006

98

Thrissur to Angamali (KL-I)

47

40

40

BOT

312.5

Mar-2009

Mar-2011

99

4-lanning of Kannur Vengalem

Kuttipuram (Package -I)

17

83.2

BOT

1366

100

NH Connectivity to ICTT
Vallarpadam

47C

17.2

15.1

NHAI

557

101

Charthalai-ochira

47

83.6

BOT

1535

LOA issued Jan 10 later withdrawn

102

KNT/Kerala Border to Kanuur

Section(Approved Length
286.3)

17

126.6

BOT

1157.16

LOA issued May 2010

103

Six lanning of Vadakkancherry Thrissuresection

47

30

BOT

617

104

4-lanning of Kannur Vengalem

Kuttipuram (Package -II)

17

81.5

BOT

1312

105

Indore-Dewas(Approved Length
55 Km)

45.05

BOT

325

Nov2010

May-2013

May-2013

106

Indore-Jhabua-Gujrat/MP
(Approved Length 168)

59

155.15

BOT

1175

Oct2010

Apr-2013

Apr-2013

Agreement signed in Feb 2010.

Aug2007

Feb2010

Feb-2010

Aug-2012

May-2012

Aug-2012

Agreement signed in Feb 2010.

107

Rajmarg Choraha to Lahknadon

(ADB-II/C-8)

26

54

34.1

ADB

251.03

Apr2006

Oct-2008

Jun-2011

108

Khalghat - MP/Maharashtra
Border

82.8

78

BOT

549

Nov2008

May-2011

May-2011

109

Gwalior Bypass (NS-1/BOT/MP1)

75, 3

42

36.29

Annuity

300.93

Apr2007

Oct-2009

Mar-2011

110

Sagar -Rajmarg Choraha (ADBII/C-6)

26

44

28.5

ADB

203.43

Apr2006

Oct-2008

Dec-2011

111

Rajmarg Choraha to Lakhandon

(ADB-II/C-9)

26

54.7

48.82

ADB

229.91

Apr2006

Oct-2008

Jun-2011

112

Lakhnadon to MP/MH Border

(NS-1/BOT/MP-3)

56.475

27.73

Annuity

407.6

Dec2007

Jun-2010

Oct-2012

113

Lakhnadon to MP/MH Border

(NS-1/BOT/MP-2)

49.35

40.11

Annuity

263.17

Mar2007

Sep-2009

Oct-2012

114

Bhopal-Sanchi(Approved
Length 40 Km)

86Ex

53.78

Annuity

209

115

Lalitpur - Sagar (ADB-II/C-4)

26

55

50.28

ADB

225

LoA issued in May 2010

Apr2006

Oct-2008

Mar-2011

116

Sagar Bypass (ADB-II/C-5)

26

26

23.3

ADB

151.3

Apr2006

Oct-2008

Nov-2011

117

Dholpur - Morena Section

(including chambal bridge) NS1/RJ-MP/1

10

2.5

NHAI

232.45

Sep2007

Sep-2010

Jun-2012

118

4 Laning of Nagpur Betul

69

176.3

Annuity

2498.76

Feb2011

Aug-2014

Aug-2014

69A &
26B

418

NHAI

1565

75

80

31.17

Annuity

604

Jun2007

Dec-2009

Jun-2011

Jun2005

Dec-2007

Apr-2011

120

Multai-Chhindwara-Seoni
section & NarsinghpurAmarwara-Umranala-Saoner
section ( 2-laning with 4 paved
shoulders)
Gwalior - Jhansi

121

Borkhedi-Jam (NS-22/MH)

27.4

27

NHAI

110

122

Panvel-Indapur

17

84

BOT

942.69

123

MP/Maharashtra Border-Dhule

98

32

BOT

835

Dec2009

Jun-2012

Jun-2012

124

Talegaon-Amravat(Approved
Length 58Km)

67.8

BOT

567

Nov2009

Nov-2013

Nov-2013

119

LOA issued Oct 2010

LOA issued Oct 2010

125

Nagpur - kondhali

40

37.8

BOT

168

Jun2006

Dec-2008

Aug-2011

126

Gonde-Vadape (Thane)

100

98

BOT

579

Apr2006

Apr-2009

Mar-2011

127

Pune-Sholapur Pkg-I(Approved
Length Pkg I & II 170 Km)

110.05

29.5

BOT

1110

Nov2009

Mar-2012

May-2012

128

Four laning from

MP/Maharashtra border to
Nagpur I/C Kamptee Kanoon
and Nagpur bypass

95

22.015

BOT

1170.52

Apr2010

Jun-2012

Oct-2012

129

Wadner-Devdhari (NS-60/MH)

29

NHAI

145

T E
R

M I N A

T E D

130

Kelapur-Pimpalkhatti (NS-62)

22

8.5

NHAI

117.4

T E
R

M I N A

T E D

131

Jam-Wadner (NS-59/MH)

30

28.605

NHAI

145

Oct2005

Apr-2008

Apr-2011

132

Pune Satara(Approved Length

145)

140.35

BOT

1724.55

Agreement signed in Mar 2010

133

Pune-Sholapur Pkg-II(Approved
Length I & II 170 Km)

105

BOT

835

LOA issued on Aug 2009

134

Butibori ROB(NS-29/MH)

1.8

0.5

NHAI

26

Jun2005

Dec-2006

Apr-2011

135

Pimpalgaon - Nasik - Gonde

60

13

BOT

940

Jan2010

Jul-2012

Jul-2012

136

Shilong-Bypass

40 &
44

50

Annuity

226

LOA issued in May 2010

137

Jorbat-Barapani

40

61.8

Annuity

536

LOA issued in May 2010

138

Balasore - Bhadrak (OR-III)

62.64

57.5

NHAI

228.7

139

Six Laning of ChandikholJagatpurBhubaneswar(Approved Length

61 Km)

67

BOT

1047

LOA issued in Apr 2010

140

Sambalpur-BaragarhChattisgarh/Orrisa Border

88

BOT

909

LOA issued in May 2010

141

Ganjam - Icchapuram (OR-VIII)

50.8

47.81

NHAI

263.27

Jul2006

Nov-2008

Apr-2011

142

Sunakhala - Ganjam (OR-VII)

55.713

33.78

NHAI

241.53

Oct2009

Oct-2011

Oct-2011

Dec2008

Dec-2010

Mar-2011

Jan2001

143

Bhubaneswar - Khurda (OR-I)

27.15

27.15

NHAI

140.85

144

Bhubneshwar-Puri(Approved
Length 59 Km)

203

67

BOT

500.29

LOA issued May 2010

145

Rimoli - Roxy Rajamunda(Approved Length

163Km)

215

96

BOT

586

LOA issued Apr 2010

146

Pathankot to Bhogpur (NS38/PB)

1A

44

14

NHAI

359

147

Four lanning of LudhiyanaTalwandi section

95

78

BOT

479

148

Kurali - Kiratpur

21

42.9

40

BOT

309

Dec2007

Jun-2010

Mar-2011

149

Amritsar - Pathankot (Approved

Length 101Km)

15

106

BOT

705

May2010

Nov-2012

Nov-2012

150

Pathankot to Jammu & Kashmir

Border (NS-36/J&K)

1A

19.65

13.375

NHAI

97.73

Nov2005

May-2008

Jun-2011

151

Pathankot to Bhogpur (NS37/PB)

1A

40

37.83

NHAI

284

Nov2005

May-2008

Jun-2011

Feb2010

Jan-2004

Aug-2012

Mar-2011

Aug-2012

LOA issued Dec 2010

152

Jaipur-Tonk - Deoli(Approved
Length 148.77 Km )

12

150

BOT

792.06

Jun2010

153

Deoli - Kota

12

83

BOT

593

154

Kishangarh-Ajmer-Beawar

82

13

BOT

795

Nov2009

May-2012

May-2012

155

Chambal Bridge (RJ-5)

76

1.4

NHAI

281.31

Nov2006

Feb-2010

Mar-2012

156

Kota Bypass (RJ-4)

76

26.42

26.35

NHAI

250.39

May2006

Nov-2008

Feb-2011

157

Jaipur-Reengus(Approved
Length 52.65 Km )

11

54

BOT

267.81

Aug-10

Feb 2013

Feb 2013

158

Six Laning of Krishnagiriwalajhapet section

46

148.3

BOT

1250

159

Madurai-Kanniakumari
Section(NS-41/TN)

39.23

39.23

NHAI

323.36

Sep2005

Apr-2008

Mar-2011

160

Kangayam to Coimbatore (KC2)

67,
KC2

55.2

54.35

MORTH

Aug2006

Aug-2008

Mar-2011

Dec-2012

Dec-2012

LOA issued Apr 2010

LoA issued in Mar 2010

161

Trichy - Dindigul

45

88.273

82

BOT

576

Jan2008

162

2 Laning of Dindigul-PerigulamTheni-Kumili

220

134

Annuity

485

Concession agreement signed in July

2010

163

Tuticorin Port

7A

47.2

SPV

182.25

164

Two Laning of Trichy - Karaikudi

and Trichy Bypass(Approved
Length 100 Km)

210 &
67

110.372

Annuity

374

165

Madurai-Arupukottai-Tuticorin

45B

128.16

127

BOT

629

Jan2007

Jan-2010

Feb-2011

166

Salem-Ulundrupet (BOT-1/TN06)

68

136.357

97

BOT

941

Jan2008

Jan-2011

Jun-2011

167

Chengapalli to Coimbatore
Bypass and End of Coimbatore
Bypass to TN/Kerala Border

47

54.83

BOT

852

168

Thanjarur - Trichy

67

56

54.16

BOT

280

Dec2006

Jun-2009

Feb-2011

169

Chennai - Tada (Six lane)

43.4

BOT

353.37

Apr2009

Oct-2011

Oct-2011

Apr2010

Jul-2010

Apr-2012

Mar-2011

Apr-2012

LOA issued May 2010

LOA issued Jan 2010

170

New 4-Lane Elevated Road

from Chennai Port Maduravoyal

Sep2010

19

BOT

1655

Sep-2013

Sep-2013

171

Development of Adiquate Road

Connectivity to Chennai Ennore Port Connectivity

SR

30.2

SPV

600

LOA issued Dec 2010

172

Six Laning of Hosur-Krishnagiri

59.87

BOT

535

LOA issued May 2010

173

Trichy - Karur

67

79.7

58

BOT

516

Jan2008

Jul-2010

Jun-2011

174

Kanniyakumari-Panagudi(NS32)

31.7

30.83

NHAI

120

Apr2008

Apr-2010

May-2011

175

Improvement of Access of GQ
within Chennai City including
Construction of 4 grade
Seperators

205 , 4
& 45

MORTH

210

Apr2005

Apr-2007

Mar-11

176

Pondicherry - Tindivanam

66

38.61

35.7

BOT

285

Jan2008

Jul-2010

Apr-2011

177

Tirupati -Tiruthani Chennai(Approved Length

125.5 Km)

205

124.7

BOT

571

178

Garhmukteshwar - Muradabad

24

56.25

55.85

NHAI

275

LOA issued Apr 2010

Mar2005

Sep-2007

Mar-2011

Dec2005

179

Kasia to Gorakhpur (LMNHP-7)

28

40

33.5

WB

242

Dec-2008

May-2011

180

Kanpur - Kabrai

86

123

BOT

373.47

181

Lalitpur Sagar (ADB-II/C-3)

26

38

30

ADB

198

May2006

Nov-2008

Mar-2011

182

Meerut-Muzaffarnagar

58

79

75

BOT

359

Mar2006

Mar-2009

Mar-2011

183

Gorakhpur Bypass

28

32.6

18.5

Annuity

600.24

Apr2007

Oct-2009

Jun-2011

184

Ayodhya-Lucknow (LMNHP-3)

28

46

45.5

WB

212

Nov2005

Nov-2008

Mar-2011

185

Hapur - Garhmukteshwar

24

35

23

NHAI

220

Mar2005

Sep-2007

Jun-2011

186

Gorakhpur-Ayodhya (LMNHP-4)

28

29

27.25

WB

205

Nov2005

Nov-2008

Mar-2011

187

Gorakhpur-Ayodhya (LMNHP-5)

28

44

33

WB

227

Oct2005

Oct-2008

Jun-2011

LOA issued Nov 2010

Oct2005

188

Gorakhpur-Ayodhya (LMNHP-6)

28

44.86

44.77

WB

239

Oct-2008

Feb-2011

189

Agra - Aligarh

93

79

BOT

250.5

LOA issued Nov 2010

190

Aligarh - Kanpur

91

268

BOT

723.68

LOA issued Dec 2010

191

Raibariely to Allahabad

24B

119

BOT

291.36

LOA issued Dec 2010

192

Jhansi to Lalitpur (NS1/BOT/UP-2)

25, 26

49.7

38.7

Annuity

355.06

Mar2007

Sep-2009

Mar-2011

193

Lucknow - Kanpur (EW/3B)

25

16

15.3

NHAI

54

Feb2010

Aug-2011

Aug-2011

194

Bara to Orai

2, 25

62.8

59

Annuity

465

Oct2006

Apr-2009

Mar-2011

195

Agra-Shikohabad (GTRIP/I-A)

50.83

50.76

WB

367.49

Mar2002

Mar-2005

Mar-2011

196

Lucknow Bypass (EW-15/UP)

56A &
B

22.85

18

NHAI

111.78

Mar2009

Aug-2010

Mar-2011

197

Muradabad-Bareily (Approved
Length 112)

24

121

BOT

1267

198

Ganga Bridge to Rama Devi

Crossing (UP-6)

25

5.6

0.7

NHAI

201.66

Dec2005

Sep-2008

Jun-2011

199

Sitapur - Lucknow

24

75

64.5

BOT

322

Jun2006

Jun-2009

Mar-2011

200

New 4 laning Agra Bypass (NS1/UP-1)

2,3

32.8

NHAI

348.16

Oct2007

Oct-2010

Jun-2013

201

Bareily - Sitapur(Approved
Length 134 Km)

24

151.2

BOT

1046

202

UP/Bihar Border to Kasia

(LMNHP-8)

28

41.115

35

WB

227

203

Ghaziabad-Aligarh (Approved
Length 106 )

91

126

BOT

1141

204

Jhansi Bypass (UP-3)

25

15

14.83

ADB

158.06

Nov2005

May-2008

Mar-2011

205

Orai to Jhansi (UP-4)

25

68.2

68.2

ADB

451.97

Oct2005

Apr-2008

Mar-2011

Agreement signed in Feb 2010

Agreement signed in June 2010

Dec2005

Dec-2008

Jun-2011

Agreement signed in May 2010

206

Ayodhya-Lucknow (LMNHP-2)

28

47

45.5

WB

217

Oct2005

Oct-2008

Mar-2011

207

Orai to Jhansi (UP-5)

25

50

48.1

ADB

340.68

Sep2005

Mar-2008

Mar-2011

208

Ayodhya-Lucknow (LMNHP-1)

28

36.75

34

WB

193

Oct2005

Oct-2008

Mar-2011

209

Jhansi to Lalitpur (NS1/BOT/UP-3)

26

49.3

48

Annuity

276.09

Mar2007

Sep-2009

Mar-2011

210

Muzaffarnagar - Haridwar
(Approved Length 77 )

58, 72

80

BOT

754

Agreement signed in Feb 2010

211

Haridwar - Dehradun (Approved

Length 69)

72

39

Annuity

478

Agreement signed in Feb 2010

212

Assam/WB Border to Gairkatta

(WB-1)

31C

32

17.33

NHAI

221.82

Jun2006

Nov-2008

Sep-2011

213

Dalkola Bypass

34

5.5

NHAI

67

Sep2006

Aug-2008

Jun-2011

214

Haldia Port

41

53

48.242

SPV

522

Sep2008

Sep-2010

Jun-2011

215

4 Laning of Brahampore-Faraka

34

103

BOT

998.79

Agreement signed in July 2010

216

4 Laning of Faraka-Raiganj

34

103

BOT

1078.84

Agreement signed in July 2010

217

4 Laning of Raiganj-Dalkola

34

50

BOT

580.43

Agreement signed in July 2010

218

Bridges section (WB-III)

1.732

0.48

NHAI

81

T E R

M I N A

T E D

219

Siliguri to Islampur (WB-7)

31

26

17.84

NHAI

225

Jan2006

Jul-2008

Dec-2012

Annexure V
List of Under Implementation (NS-EW Corridor) Projects :

S.No

Stretch

NH No

Total
Length
(Km)

Complete
Completio
UI Length
Anticipated
d length
Start Date n as per
(km)
Completion
(Km)
contract

State Name

Category

Nagaon to Dharmatul (AS-2)

37

25

12

13

Dec-2005 Jun-2008

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

Brahmputra Bridge (AS-28)

31

Oct-2006 Apr-2010

Mar-2012

Assam

EW

Bijni to Assam/WB Border (AS-10)

31C

33

10.1

22.9

Nov-2005 Jun-2008

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

Sonapur to Guwahati (AS-3)

37

19

14

Sep-2005 Jun-2009

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

Dharamtul to Sonapur (AS-20)

37

22

15

Nov-2005 May-2008

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

Dharamtul to Sonapur (AS-19)

37

25

14.602

10.398

Dec-2005 Jun-2008

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

Nagaon bypass (AS-18)

37

23

22.185

0.815

Dec-2005 Jun-2008

Apr-2011

Assam

EW

Daboka to Nagaon (AS-17)

36

30.5

23.415

7.085

Dec-2005 Jun-2008

Oct-2011

Assam

EW

Lumding to Daboka (AS-15)

54

18.5

10.7

7.8

Feb-2008 Aug-2010

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

10

Maibang to Lumding (AS-24)

54

15

15

Feb-2011 Aug-2013

Aug-2013

Assam

EW

11

Maibang to Lumding (AS-25)

54

28

28

Mar-2011 Sep-2013

Sep-2013

Assam

EW

12

Maibang to Lumding (AS-26)

54

23

23

May-2006 Nov-2008

Dec-2013

Assam

EW

13

Lanka to Daboka (AS-16)

54

24

24

Dec-2005 Jun-2008

Mar-2011

Assam

EW

14

Harangajo to Maibang (AS-23)

54

16

6.75

9.25

Aug-2006 Feb-2009

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

15

Nalbari to Bijni (AS-9)

31

21.5

19.105

2.395

Dec-2005 Jun-2008

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

16

Nalbari to Bijni (AS-8)

31

30

26.65

3.35

Dec-2005 Jun-2008

Mar-2011

Assam

EW

17

Nalbari to Bijni (AS-7)

31

27.3

20.3

Oct-2005 Apr-2008

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

18

Nalbari to Bijni (AS-6)

31

25

13

12

Nov-2005 Jun-2009

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

19

Maibang to Lumding (AS-27)

54

21

21

Oct-2006 Apr-2009

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

20

Bijni to Assam/WB Border (AS-12)

31C

30

16.62

13.38

Nov-2005 Jun-2008

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

21

Harangajo to Maibang (AS-21)

54

26

26

Jan-2007

Jul-2009

Dec-2013

Assam

EW

22

Silchar-Udarband (AS-1)

54

32

12.5

19.5

Sep-2004 Sep-2007

Mar-2011

Assam

EW

23

Bijni to Assam/WB Border (AS-11)

31C

30

0.5

29.5

Nov-2005 Jun-2008

Dec-2011

Assam

EW

24

Guwahati to Nalbari (AS-5)

31

28

11.5

16.5

Oct-2005 Apr-2008

Mar-2012

Assam

EW

25

Guwahati to Nalbari (AS-4)

31

28

20

Dec-2005 Apr-2008

Mar-2012

Assam

EW

26

Harangajo to Maibang (AS-22)

54

24

24

Jan-2007

Jul-2009

Dec-2013

Assam

EW

27

Ring bunds to Jhanjharpur (BR-6)

57

38.55

35.6

2.95

Jan-2006 Jun-2008

Mar-2011

Bihar

EW

28

Mehsi to Kotwa (LMNHP-11)

28

40

37

Sep-2005 Sep-2008

Mar-2011

Bihar

EW

29

Muzzaffarpur to Mehsi (LMNHP-12)

28

40

37

Sep-2005 Sep-2008

Mar-2011

Bihar

EW

30

Darbanga to Muzzaffarpur (BR-9)

57

37.75

37.75

Jan-2006 Jun-2008

Feb-2011

Bihar

EW

31

Jhanjhapur to Darbanga (BR-7)

57

37.59

22

15.59

Apr-2006 Sep-2008

Dec-2011

Bihar

EW

32

Deewapur to UP/Bihar Border

(LMNHP-9)

28

41.085

34.085

Nov-2005 Oct-2008

Jun-2012

Bihar

EW

33

Kosi Bridge including approaches

and Guide Bond & Afflux Bond (BR5)

57

10.63

10.63

Apr-2007 Apr-2010

Jun-2011

Bihar

EW

34

Simrahi to Ring bund (missing link)

(BR-4)

57

15.15

13.36

1.79

Apr-2006 Apr-2008

Jun-2011

Bihar

EW

35

Kotwa to Dewapur (LMNHP-10)

28

38

33

Nov-2005 Nov-2008

Mar-2011

Bihar

EW

36

Purnea - Gayakota (EW-12/BR)

31

28

26.41

1.59

Sep-2001 Sep-2004

Mar-2011

Bihar

EW

37

Darbanga to Muzzaffarpur (BR-8)

57

32.05

31.75

0.3

Jan-2006 Jun-2008

Nov-2011

Bihar

EW

38

Forbesganj-Simrahi (BR-3)

57

34.87

13.5

21.37

Apr-2006 Sep-2008

Jun-2011

Bihar

EW

39

Gagodhar to Garamore (Package-IV)

15, 8A

90.3

87.5

2.8

Feb-2005 Nov-2007

Mar-2011

Gujarat

EW

40

Chambal Bridge (RJ-5)

76

1.4

1.4

Nov-2006 Feb-2010

Mar-2012

Rajasthan

EW

41

Kota Bypass (RJ-4)

76

26.42

26.35

0.07

May-2006 Nov-2008

Feb-2011

Rajasthan

EW

42

Ayodhya-Lucknow (LMNHP-2)

28

47

45.5

1.5

Oct-2005 Oct-2008

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

43

Kasia to Gorakhpur (LMNHP-7)

28

40

33.5

6.5

Dec-2005 Dec-2008

May-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

44

Jhansi Bypass (UP-3)

25

15

14.83

0.17

Nov-2005 May-2008

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

45

UP/Bihar Border to Kasia (LMNHP-8)

28

41.115

35

6.115

Dec-2005 Dec-2008

Jun-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

46

Ayodhya-Lucknow (LMNHP-3)

28

46

45.5

0.5

Nov-2005 Nov-2008

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

47

Gorakhpur-Ayodhya (LMNHP-4)

28

29

27.25

1.75

Nov-2005 Nov-2008

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

48

Orai to Jhansi (UP-5)

25

50

48.1

1.9

Sep-2005 Mar-2008

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

49

Gorakhpur-Ayodhya (LMNHP-5)

28

44

33

11

Oct-2005 Oct-2008

Jun-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

50

Bara to Orai

2, 25

62.8

59

3.8

Oct-2006 Apr-2009

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

51

Lucknow - Kanpur (EW/3B)

25

16

15.3

0.7

Feb-2010 Aug-2011

Aug-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

52

Ganga Bridge to Rama Devi Crossing

(UP-6)

25

5.6

0.7

4.9

Dec-2005 Sep-2008

Jun-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

53

Ayodhya-Lucknow (LMNHP-1)

28

36.75

34

2.75

Oct-2005 Oct-2008

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

54

Gorakhpur Bypass

28

32.6

18.5

14.1

Apr-2007 Oct-2009

Jun-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

55

Lucknow Bypass (EW-15/UP)

56A & B

22.85

18

4.85

Mar-2009 Aug-2010

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

56

Gorakhpur-Ayodhya (LMNHP-6)

28

44.86

44.77

0.09

Oct-2005 Oct-2008

Feb-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

57

Orai to Jhansi (UP-4)

25

68.2

68.2

Oct-2005 Apr-2008

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

EW

58

Assam/WB Border to Gairkatta (WB1)

31C

32

17.33

14.67

Jun-2006 Nov-2008

Sep-2011

West Bengal

EW

59

Siliguri to Islampur (WB-7)

31

26

17.84

8.16

Jan-2006

Jul-2008

Dec-2012

West Bengal

EW

60

Gundla Pochampalli to Bowenpalli

Shivarampalli to Thondapalli (NS23/AP)

23.1

16.2

6.9

Dec-2005 Dec-2006

Mar-2011

Andhra
Pradesh

NS

61

Armur to Kadloor Yellareddy (NS2/AP-1) (Approved Length 60.25)

59

11.9

47.1

Feb-2010 Feb-2012

Feb-2012

Andhra
Pradesh

NS

62

Eight laning of Haryana/ Delhi

Border to Mukaraba Chowk (NS18/DL)

12.9

12.9

63

Quazigund-Banihal

1A

15.25

15.25

64

Kunjwani to Vijaypur (NS-15/J&K)

1A

17.2

17

65

Chenani-Nashri

1A

12

66

Srinagar Bypass (Bridge Portion)

(NS-30A)

1A

67

Jammu to Kunjwani (Jammu

Bypass) NS-33/J&K

68

Jun-2009 Sep-2010

Mar-2011

Delhi

NS

Jul-2015

Jul-2015

Jammu
Kashmir

NS

0.2

Jan-2002 Dec-2004

Mar-2011

Jammu
Kashmir

NS

12

Jun-2010 Jun-2015

Jul-2015

Jammu
Kashmir

NS

1.23

1.23

Jun-2006 Dec-2008

Dec-2011

Jammu
Kashmir

NS

1A

15

14.7

0.3

Nov-2005 May-2008

Mar-2011

Jammu
Kashmir

NS

Vijaypur to Pathankot (NS-34/J&K)

1A

33.65

27.95

5.7

Sep-2005 Feb-2008

Jun-2011

Jammu
Kashmir

NS

69

Jammu - Udhampur

1A

65

65

Jul-2010

Jul-2013

Jul-2013

Jammu
Kashmir

NS

70

Vijaypur to Pathankot (NS-35/J&K)

1A

30

25.85

4.15

Sep-2005 Feb-2008

Jun-2011

Jammu
Kashmir

NS

71

Srinagar to Banihal

1A

67.76

67.76

Jammu
Kashmir

NS

72

Six lanning of Vadakkancherry Thrissuresection

47

30

30

Feb-2010 Aug-2012

Aug-2012

Kerala

NS

73

Thrissur to Angamali (KL-I)

47

40

40

Sep-2006 Mar-2009

Mar-2011

Kerala

NS

74

Sagar -Rajmarg Choraha (ADB-II/C-6)

26

44

28.5

15.5

Apr-2006 Oct-2008

Dec-2011

Madhya
Pradesh

NS

75

Sagar Bypass (ADB-II/C-5)

26

26

23.3

2.7

Apr-2006 Oct-2008

Nov-2011

Madhya
Pradesh

NS

76

Lakhnadon to MP/MH Border (NS1/BOT/MP-3)

56.475

27.73

28.745

Dec-2007 Jun-2010

Oct-2012

Madhya
Pradesh

NS

77

Rajmarg Choraha to Lahknadon

(ADB-II/C-8)

26

54

34.1

19.9

Apr-2006 Oct-2008

Jun-2011

Madhya
Pradesh

NS

78

Gwalior Bypass (NS-1/BOT/MP-1)

75, 3

42

36.29

5.71

Apr-2007 Oct-2009

Mar-2011

Madhya
Pradesh

NS

79

Rajmarg Choraha to Lakhandon

(ADB-II/C-9)

26

54.7

48.82

5.88

Apr-2006 Oct-2008

Jun-2011

Madhya
Pradesh

NS

80

Lakhnadon to MP/MH Border (NS1/BOT/MP-2)

49.35

40.11

9.24

Mar-2007 Sep-2009

Oct-2012

Madhya
Pradesh

NS

81

Lalitpur - Sagar (ADB-II/C-4)

26

55

50.28

4.72

Apr-2006 Oct-2008

Mar-2011

Madhya
Pradesh

NS

82

Dholpur - Morena Section (including

chambal bridge) NS-1/RJ-MP/1

10

2.5

7.5

Sep-2007 Sep-2010

Jun-2012

Madhya
Pradesh
[1]/Rajasthan
[9]

NS

Jul-2010

LoA issued in Sept 2010

83

Gwalior - Jhansi

75

80

31.17

48.83

Jun-2007 Dec-2009

Jun-2011

Madhya
Pradesh[68.5
]/Uttar
Pradesh[11.5

NS

84

Four laning from MP/Maharashtra

border to Nagpur I/C Kamptee
Kanoon and Nagpur bypass

95

22.015

72.985

Apr-2010 Jun-2012

Oct-2012

Maharashtra

NS

85

Wadner-Devdhari (NS-60/MH)

29

29

T E D

Maharashtra

NS

86

Borkhedi-Jam (NS-22/MH)

27.4

27

0.4

Jun-2005 Dec-2007

Apr-2011

Maharashtra

NS

87

Jam-Wadner (NS-59/MH)

30

28.605

1.395

Oct-2005 Apr-2008

Apr-2011

Maharashtra

NS

88

Kelapur-Pimpalkhatti (NS-62)

22

8.5

13.5

T E D

Maharashtra

NS

89

Butibori ROB(NS-29/MH)

1.8

0.5

1.3

Jun-2005 Dec-2006

Apr-2011

Maharashtra

NS

90

Pathankot to Jammu & Kashmir

Border (NS-36/J&K)

1A

19.65

13.375

6.275

Nov-2005 May-2008

Jun-2011

Punjab

NS

91

Pathankot to Bhogpur (NS-38/PB)

1A

44

14

30

Feb-2010 Aug-2012

Aug-2012

Punjab

NS

92

Pathankot to Bhogpur (NS-37/PB)

1A

40

37.83

2.17

Nov-2005 May-2008

Jun-2011

Punjab[29]/H
imanchal
Pradesh[11]

NS

93

Chengapalli to Coimbatore Bypass

and End of Coimbatore Bypass to
TN/Kerala Border

47

54.83

54.83

Tamil Nadu

NS

94

Kanniyakumari-Panagudi(NS-32)

31.7

30.83

0.87

Apr-2008 Apr-2010

May-2011

Tamil Nadu

NS

95

Madurai-Kanniakumari Section(NS41/TN)

39.23

39.23

Sep-2005 Apr-2008

Mar-2011

Tamil Nadu

NS

96

Jhansi to Lalitpur (NS-1/BOT/UP-2)

25, 26

49.7

38.7

11

Mar-2007 Sep-2009

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

NS

97

Lalitpur Sagar (ADB-II/C-3)

26

38

30

May-2006 Nov-2008

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

NS

98

Jhansi to Lalitpur (NS-1/BOT/UP-3)

26

49.3

48

1.3

Mar-2007 Sep-2009

Mar-2011

Uttar
Pradesh

NS

99

New 4 laning Agra Bypass (NS-1/UP1)

2,3

32.8

32.8

Oct-2007 Oct-2010

Jun-2013

Uttar
Pradesh

NS

T E R

T E R

M I N A

M I N A

LOA issued Jan 2010

List of Fully Completed (NS-EW Corridor) Projects : Status as on 31.01.11

S.No

Stretch

NH No

Total
Length
(Km)

Complete
Completio
UI Length
Anticipated
d length
Start Date n as per
(km)
Completion
(Km)
contract

State Name

Category

Guwahati Bypass (EW-14/AS)

37

10.5

10.5

Sep-2001 Sep-2003

Jun-2004

Assam

EW

Guahati bypass (EW/7)

37

Jun-2000 Jun-2002

Dec-2003

Assam

EW

Purnea-Forbesganj (BR-2)

57

36.7

36.7

Nov-2005 Apr-2008

Jul-2010

Bihar

EW

Purnea-Forbesganj (BR-1)

57

42.5

42.5

Nov-2005 Apr-2008

Apr-2010

Bihar

EW

Purnea - Gayakota (EW/4)

31

15.15

15.15

Dec-1999 Mar-2002

May-2008

Bihar

EW

Deesa to Radhanpur (Package-VI)

14

85.4

85.4

Feb-2005 Nov-2007

Sep-2008

Gujarat

EW

Ribda to Gondal section (EW-10/GJ)

8B

17

17

Sep-2001 Apr-2003

Oct-2002

Gujarat

EW

Palanpur - Dessa (EW-11/GJ)

14

22.7

22.7

Aug-2001 Aug-2003

Feb-2003

Gujarat

EW

Jetpur to Bhiladi (Package-II)

8B

64.5

64.5

Feb-2005 Nov-2007

Jan-2009

Gujarat

EW

10
11

Rajkot - Ribda
Bamnaborr - Rajkot
Abu Road Deesa Section near
Palanpur (EW/1)

8B
8B

15
31

15
31

0
0

Gujarat
Gujarat

EW
EW

14

10

10

Dec-1999 Apr-2001

Apr-2001

Gujarat

EW

13

Radhanpur to Gagodhar (Package-V)

15

106.2

106.2

Feb-2005 Nov-2007

May-2008

Gujarat

EW

14

Garamore to Bamanbore (PackageIII)

8A

71.4

71.4

Feb-2005 Nov-2007

Jul-2009

Gujarat

EW

15

Bhiladi to Porbandar (Package-I)

8B

50.5

50.5

Feb-2005 Nov-2007

May-2007

Gujarat

EW

8B

36

36

Sep-2005 Mar-2008

Mar-2008

Gujarat

EW

12

16
17

Rajkot Bypass & Gondal Jetpur

(Package-VII)
Shivpuri Bypass & upto MP/RJ
Border(EW-II - MP-I)

By MoRT&H
By MoRT&H

25, 76

53

53

Aug-2005 Feb-2008

Oct-2008

Madhya
Pradesh
Madhya
Pradesh

EW

18

Jhansi-Shivpuri (EW-II - MP-2)

25

35

35

Aug-2005 Feb-2008

Nov-2008

19

Chittorgarh Bypass (RJ-6)

76

40

40

Oct-2005 Apr-2008

Dec-2008

Rajasthan

EW

20

Gogunda to Udaipur (RJ-3)

76

31

31

Jan-2006

Jul-2008

Dec-2009

Rajasthan

EW

21

Kota to Chittorgarh (RJ-7)

76

63

63

Oct-2005 Apr-2008

Dec-2008

Rajasthan

EW

22

Bakaria to Gogunda (RJ-2)

76

44

44

Nov-2005 May-2008

Mar-2009

Rajasthan

EW

23
24
25
26
27

RJ/MP Border to Kota (RJ-9)

RJ/MP Border to Kota (RJ-11)
Kota to Chittorgarh (RJ-8)
RJ/MP Border to Kota (RJ-10)
Swaroopganj to Bakaria (RJ-1)

76
76
76
76
76, 14

43.15
70
65
59.85
43

43.15
70
65
59.85
43

0
0
0
0
0

Oct-2005
Sep-2005
Oct-2005
Oct-2005
Dec-2005

Apr-2008
Mar-2008
Apr-2008
Apr-2008
Jun-2008

Jun-2009
Oct-2008
Dec-2008
Jun-2009
May-2009

Rajasthan
Rajasthan
Rajasthan
Rajasthan
Rajasthan

EW
EW
EW
EW
EW

28

Palanpur to Swaroopganj (Rajasthan

-42 km & Gujarat-34 km )

14

76

76

Sep-2006 Mar-2009

May-2009

Rajasthan[42]
/Gujarat[34]

EW

29

Lucknow-Kanpur section (EW-9/UP)

25

15.5

15.5

Sep-2001 Apr-2003

Mar-2005

30

Lucknow Kanpur Section (EW/2)

25

10.42

10.42

Apr-2000 Oct-2001

Aug-2002

31

Lucknow-Kanpur section (EW-8/UP)

25

22.2

22.2

Sep-2001 Nov-2003

Feb-2006

32

Jhansi-Shivpuri (UP/MP-1) (UP-11

km & MP - 30 km)

25

41

41

Oct-2005 Apr-2008

May-2009

33

Silliguri to Islampur (WB-6)

31

25

25

Apr-2006 Oct-2008

Oct-2008

West Bengal

EW

34

Dalkola - Islampur (EW/5)

31

23

23

Dec-1999 Mar-2002

Mar-2004

West Bengal

EW

31

23.85

23.85

Apr-2000

Nov-2005

West Bengal

EW

35
36
37
38
39

Dalkola Islampur Sub section

2(EW/6)
Farukhanagar to Kotakatta (NS-2/AP4)
Thondapalli to Farukhanagar (NS/9)
Kalkallu village to Gundla
Pochampali (NS-8)
Hyderabad Bangalore section (ADB11/C-11)

Jul-2002

55.74

55.74

Aug-2006 Feb-2009

Mar-2009

12.5

12.5

Dec-1999 Jun-2001

Jan-2003

17

17

Dec-1999 Dec-2001

Apr-2002

41.35

41.35

Mar-2007 Aug-2009

Jan-2011

Uttar
Pradesh
Uttar
Pradesh
Uttar
Pradesh
Uttar
Pradesh[11]/
Madhya
Pradesh[30]

Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh

EW

EW
EW
EW

EW

NS
NS
NS
NS

40
41
42
43

Hyderabad Bangalore section (ADB11/C-10)

Hyderabad Bangalore section (NS2/BOT/AP-5)
Bowenpalli (Hyderabad city) to
Shivarampalli
Islam Nagar to Kadtal (NS-2/BOT/AP7)

40.35

40.35

Mar-2007 Aug-2009

Jan-2011

74.65

74.65

Sep-2006 Mar-2009

Nov-2009

9.2

9.2

53.01

53.01

Mar-2007 Mar-2010

Aug-2010

By MoRT&H

Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh

NS
NS
NS

44

Farukhanagar to Kottakata (NS-2/AP3)

46.162

46.162

Aug-2006 Feb-2009

Feb-2009

45

Kadal to Armur (NS-2/BOT/AP-8)

31

31

May-2007 Nov-2009

Nov-2009

46

MH/AP border to Islam Nagar (NS2/BOT/AP-6)

54.6

54.6

May-2007 Nov-2009

Aug-2010

47

Hyderabad Bangalore section (ADB11/C-15)(Approved length 45.6)

45.05

45.05

Mar-2007 Aug-2009

Nov-2010

42

42

Mar-2007 Aug-2009

Nov-2010

40

40

Mar-2007 Sep-2009

Dec-2010

42.88

42.88

Mar-2007 Sep-2009

Jan-2011

85.74

85.74

Sep-2006 Mar-2009

Mar-2009

1
1

10
116

10
116

0
0

Jan-2006

1A

17.8

17.8

Oct-2003 Sep-2008

Nov-2010

Jan-2000 Oct-2001

Jul-2001

Karnataka

NS

61.38

61.38

Mar-2007 Mar-2009

Dec-2009

Karnataka

NS

25

25

Sep-2001 Mar-2004

Aug-2008

Karnataka

NS

47
47

17
16.6

17
16.6

0
0

By MoRT&H
Sep-2001 Aug-2003 Jun-2004

Kerala
Kerala
Madhya
Pradesh
Madhya
Pradesh
Madhya
Pradesh
Madhya
Pradesh

NS
NS

Maharashtra

NS

Maharashtra

NS

Mar-2002

Maharashtra

NS

58
59

Hyderabad Bangalore section (ADB11/C-14)

Hyderabad Bangalore section (ADB11/C-13)
Hyderabad Bangalore section (ADB11/C-12)
Kadloor Yellareddy to Gundla
Pochampalli (NS-2/BOT/AP-2)
Panipat Elevated Highway
Ambala-Panipat
Srinagar Bypass (Road Portion)(NS30)
Avathi village to Nandi Hills cross &
Six laning of Devanhalli Meenukunte (NS-10)
AP/Karnatka border- Nandi Hill
crossing & Devenhalli to Meenu
Kunte Village
Nandi Hills Cross to Devanhalli & Six
laning of Meenukunte to Habbal
(NS-24/KN)
Thrissur - Kochi Section
Angamali to Aluva (NS-28/KL)

60

Sarai Cholla to Morena (NS-20/MP)

15

15

Sep-2001 Jun-2003

Aug-2004

61

Sagar Rajmarg choraha (ADB-II/C-7)

26

43.16

43.16

Apr-2006 Oct-2008

Dec-2010

18

18

Aug-2001 May-2003

Dec-2005

Jul-2000

Dec-2001

Jan-2003

Oct-2005 Apr-2008

Oct-2010

48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55

56

57

62
63

Morena - Rairu (Start of Gwalior

bypass) (NS-21/MP)
MP/RAJ border to Sarai Cholla
(NS/6)

64

Devdhari-Kelapur (NS-61/MH)

30

30

65

Nagpur- Chinchbhuvan

9.2

9.2

25.6

25.6

Jan-2009
Jun-2008
By MoRT&H

By MoRT&H

Andhra
Pradesh

NS

Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh
Andhra
Pradesh
Haryana
Haryana
Jammu
Kashmir

NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS

NS
NS
NS
NS

67

Chinchbguvan-Butibori - Borkhedi
(NS-7)
Phagwara Junction on NH-1

Dec-2005 Dec-2006

Jan-2008

Punjab

NS

68

Bhogpur to Jalandhar (NS-16/PB)

1A

21.77

21.77

Aug-2001 Aug-2003

Oct-2004

Punjab

NS

69

Jalandhar Bypass (NS/1)

14.4

14.4

Nov-1999 Feb-2002

Jun-2004

Punjab

NS

70
71

Jalandhar-Ambala
Mania - Dholpur (NS/5)

1
3

160.7
10

160.7
10

0
0

By MoRT&H
Dec-1999 Mar-2001 Mar-2001

Punjab
Rajasthan

NS
NS

72

Thumpipadi to Salem (NS-26/TN)

19.2

19.2

Sep-2001 Aug-2003

Mar-2010

Tamil Nadu

NS

73

Salem to Karur (NS-2/TN-3)

33.48

33.48

Jul-2006

Jan-2009

Aug-2009

Tamil Nadu

NS

74

Karur to Madurai (TN-4)

68.125

68.125

Oct-2006 Apr-2009

Nov-2009

Tamil Nadu

NS

75

Thopurghat to Thumpipadi (NS25/TN)

16.6

16.6

May-2005 Nov-2007

Jan-2010

Tamil Nadu

NS

76

Krishnagiri to Thopurghat (NS2/TN1)

62.5

62.5

Jul-2006

Dec-2008

Jan-2009

Tamil Nadu

NS

77

Thopurghar section (NS/14)

7.4

7.4

Dec-1999 Sep-2001

Apr-2002

Tamil Nadu

NS

78

Construction of Karur ROB

0.84

0.84

Jul-1999 Mar-2001

Sep-2002

Tamil Nadu

NS

79

Karur to Madurai (TN-5)

53.025

53.023

Jul-2006

Sep-2009

Tamil Nadu

NS

66

Sep-1999 Mar-2002

Jan-2009

80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89

Salem to Karur (NS-2/TN-2)

Bangalore - Salem - Madurai (NS27/TN)
Salem bypass (NS/12)
4 laning of Karur Bypass including
additional bridge across river
Amarawati
Salem to Kerala Border Section (TN7)
km 120 of Madurai - Tirunelveli
Section to Panagudi (km 203) (NS43)
Madurai-Kanniakumari Section (NS42/TN)
Salem to Kerala Border Section (TN6)
Madurai-Kanniakumari Section (NS40/TN)
Madurai to km 120 of Madurai Tirunelveli Section including
Madurai Bypass (NS-39)

41.55

41.55

Aug-2006 Feb-2009

Aug-2009

Tamil Nadu

NS

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.4

Sep-2001 Nov-2002

Apr-2004

Tamil Nadu

NS

Dec-1999 Sep-2001

Jan-2003

Tamil Nadu

NS

9.36

9.36

Aug-1999 Aug-2001

Sep-2002

Tamil Nadu

NS

47

48.51

48.51

Jul-2006

Jan-2009

Aug-2009

Tamil Nadu

NS

43

43

Oct-2005 May-2008

Aug-2009

Tamil Nadu

NS

42.7

42.7

Sep-2005 Mar-2008

Aug-2010

Tamil Nadu

NS

47

53.525

53.525

Jul-2006

Jan-2009

Apr-2010

Tamil Nadu

NS

38.86

38.86

Sep-2005 Apr-2008

Sep-2009

Tamil Nadu

NS

42

42

Sep-2005 Apr-2008

Sep-2009

Tamil Nadu

NS

90

Agra - Raj/UP Border (NS-4)

16

16

Dec-1999 Sep-2001

Nov-2001

Uttar
Pradesh

NS

91

Raj/UP border to Mania (NS19/UP/RJ)

17

17

Aug-2001 Aug-2003

Jan-2005

Uttar
Pradesh[7]/R
ajasthan[10]

NS

20

20

Oct-2006 Oct-2008

Dec-2010

Haryana

NS

15

15

Dec-1999 Jun-2001

Nov-2001

Haryana

NS

21.7

21.7

Jan-2006

Jul-2007

Dec-2010

Haryana

NS

8.5

8.5

Nov-2001 Nov-2003

Jan-2007

Delhi

NS

92
93
94
95

Panipat to Panchi Gujran (Six laning

work) (NS-89/HR)
Six laning of Kamaspur to Haryana /
Delhi Border (NS/2)
Six laning of Panchi Gujran to
Kamaspur (Sonepat) (NS-17/HR)
Eight Laning of Mukarba Chowk to
Mall Road (Delhi)(NS3/DL)

Annexure VI
Details of projects of Golden Quadrilateral under implementation
S.No. Stretch

Total
NH No. Length (In
km )

Completed
length (In
Km)

Funded
By

Date of
Start

Date of
completion as
per contract

Date of
anticipated
completion

Total
Project
cost (Rs
Cr.)

33.78

NHAI

Oct-09

Oct-11

Oct-11

241.53

Reasons for delay

Under Implementation

Sunakhala - Ganjam (OR-VII)

Ganjam - Icchapuram (OR-VIII)

Balasore - Bhadrak (OR-III)

55.71

50.8

62.64

47.81

57.5

NHAI

NHAI

Jul-06

Dec-08

Nov-08

Dec-10

Apr-11

Mar-11

263.27

Due to persistent non-performance of the contractor, the contract with M/s PCL
STICC was terminated in April 2008. The balance work has since been awarded
the work is in process. 4- laning of 21.20 km is already completed. The balance
work is scheduled for completion October, 2011

Due to non-performance of the original contractor M/s Bhumi Hiways DDBL, the
contract was terminated in January, 2004. Balance work, after settlement of court
cases filed by the terminated contractor, could be awarded only in July, 2006.
The work was targeted for completion in November, 2008. Due to various reasons
including delay in permission by the State Government, for blasting license, Stay
order by the Honble High Court, for quarrying stone aggregate, seizure of crushing
unit of the contractor, as per direction of Honble Orissa High Court, has also
delayed the project. The project is likely to be completed by April, 2011.

228.7

Due to persistent non-performance of the contractor, the contract with M/s ElsamexTWS-SNC was terminated in December 2007. Balance work was awarded to M/s
BBEL- MIPL (JV) in November, 2008. There has been initial procedural delay in the
allotment of quarry by State Government. The contractor initially applied for the
quarry on 28.08.2008 and he has got the permission on 28.07.2009. The work is
scheduled for completion by March, 2011.

Agra-Shikohabad (GTRIP/I-A)

50.83

50.76

WB

Mar-02

Mar-05

Mar-11

367.49

Delay in approval for traffic cum power block and dismantling scheme of existing
two lane Tundla ROB. Due to revised GAD for ROB.
Due to poor performance of Contractor (GIL), the case of declaring nonperformance has been processed.

Haveri - Harihar

56

56

NHAI

Nov-08

Jul-10

Mar-11

196.65

The work due to poor performance of contractor was terminated Jan 2007 and
balance work reawarded in Sept. 2008, the balance work is in progress.

Harihar - Chitradurga

77

77

NHAI

Oct-08

Jun-10

Mar-11

207.56

The work due to poor performance of contractor was terminated Jan 2007 and
balance work reawarded in Sept. 2008, the balance work is in progress

S.No. Stretch

Bhubaneswar - Khurda (OR-I)

Bridges section (WB-III)

Total
NH No. Length (In
km )

27.15

1.73

Completed
length (In
Km)

Funded
By

Date of
Start

Date of
completion as
per contract

Date of
anticipated
completion

Total
Project
cost (Rs
Cr.)

27.15

NHAI

Jan-01

Jan-04

Mar-11

140.85

0.48

NHAI

TERMINATED

81

Reasons for delay

Proposal is under consideration for termination of the contract.The contractor has

taken up the balance work service road,

The work was awarded to M/s Bhagirtha Engineering Ltd. in January, 2001. Out of 9
bridges, the contractor had completed 8 bridges, but did not completed bridge
(Rupnarayan Bridge). The work on the Roopnarayan Bridge was practically
standstill for more than one year, due to the acute cash flow problems of the
contractor in spite having been given financial assistance by NHAI several times.
Since the work was not progressing and contractor has failed in completing the work
despite financial assistance given to him, the Contract was terminated on
21.8.2008.
Bids for completion of balance work, were invited in December, 08 but no bids were
received. Second time bids were invited from selected Contractors/Organization in
February, 2009. But again no response came from any selected
Contractors/Organization. Third time bid has been invited in May, 2009 but no firms
have turned up for submission of bid. Accordingly, the balance work was included in
6- laning of Dankuni Kharagpur section of NH-6.

Annexure VII
Details of completed projects under Golden Quadrilateral
S.No. Stretch

Total
Funded
NH No. Length (In
By
km )

Date of
Date of Start completion as
per contract

Date of
completion

Total
Project
cost (Rs
Cr.)
83

Completed Projects

78.75

Fatehpur - Khaga (TNHP/II-C)

4
4
2
2
2

77

NHAI
NHAI
WB
WB
WB

Allahabad Bypass Contract-II

38.99

7
8

Allahabad Bypass Contract-III

Allahabad Bypass Contract-I (Bridge)

Shikohabad-Etawah (GTRIP/I-B)

10

Sasaram - Dehri on-sone (GTRIP/IV-C)

11

Etawah - Rajpur (GTRIP/I-C)

12

Tumkur Bypass

Chitradurga Bypass

Gorhar - Barwa Adda (TNHP/V-C)

Varanasi - Mohania (GTRIP/IV-A)

13

Jun-09

Sep-10

Dec-10

Apr-07

Sep-08

Dec-10

104

Sep-01

Mar-05

Sep-10

399.745

Mar-02

Mar-05

Sep-10

467.93

Mar-01

Oct-04

Sep-10

372.4

WB

Jun-04

Dec-06

Dec-09

440.93

44.71

WB

Nov-04

May-07

Dec-09

534.39

1.02

WB

Sep-03

Mar-06

Oct-08

91.36

59.02

WB

Sep-05

Sep-07

Sep-08

261.22

30

WB

Mar-02

Mar-05

Jul-08

221.87

72.83

WB

Mar-02

Mar-05

May-08

348.44

Kanpur-Fatehpur (GTRIP/II-B)

51.5

WB

Mar-02

Mar-05

May-08

495.35

13

Etawah Bypass

13.6

NHAI

Feb-06

Feb-08

May-08

132.18

14

Chitradurga - Sira

66.7

ADB

Mar-02

Aug-04

May-08

304

15

Handia - Varanasi (TNHP/III-C)

72

WB

Mar-01

Jul-04

Apr-08

286

16

Bridges section (OR-V)

11.59

NHAI

Aug-01

May-04

Apr-08

155

17

Hubli - Haveri

64.5

NHAI

Jun-01

Dec-03

Mar-08

260.93

18

Aurangabad - Barachatti (TNHP/V-A)

60

WB

Sep-01

Mar-05

Jul-07

320.42

19

Barachatti - Gorhar (GTRIP/V-B)

80

WB

Mar-02

Mar-05

Jul-07

452.71

20

Vivekananda Bridge and Approach

BOT

Sep-02

Apr-06

Jun-07

641

21

Belgaum - Dharwad

62

NHAI

Apr-02

Nov-04

Jun-07

279

22

Srikakulam - Champawati (AP-1)

48

NHAI

Dec-05

Dec-06

May-07

171.97

23

Sikandara-Bhaunti (TNHP/II-A)

62

WB

Feb-01

Aug-04

May-07

323.62

24

Laxmannath - Baleshwar (OR-4)

60

53.41

NHAI

Mar-01

Dec-03

May-07

272

25

Kanchipuram - Poonamalee

56.4

NHAI

Jul-01

Dec-03

May-07

211

26

Dhankuni - Kolaghat (WB-I)

54.4

NHAI

May-01

Mar-04

Mar-07

393

27

Katraj - Sarole (PS-3)

28.5

NHAI

Nov-01

May-04

Mar-07

97.9

28

Bridges Section (OR/WB-I)

60

NHAI

Sep-01

Jun-04

Aug-06

80

29

Belgaum Bypass

18

NHAI

Jun-01

Dec-03

Jun-06

115.9

30

Kharagpur - Laxmanath (WB-IV)

60

65.86

NHAI

Jun-01

Mar-04

Jun-06

332

31

Katraj Realignment (PS-4)

NHAI

Nov-02

Feb-05

Jun-06

146.25

32

Khurda - Sunakhala (OR-VI)

52.06

NHAI

May-01

Dec-03

Mar-06

189.68

33

Mohania - Sasaram (TNHP/IV-B)

45

WB

Feb-01

Feb-04

Mar-06

230.55

34

Chilkaluripet - Ongole (AP-13)

66

NHAI

Jun-01

Dec-03

Mar-06

319.21

35

Satara - Kagal

133

BOT

Feb-02

May-04

Mar-06

600

36

Vaniyambadi - Pallikonda (KR-2)

46

51

NHAI

Nov-01

May-04

Feb-06

223

37

Pallikonda - Ranipet and Walahjapet bypass (KR-3)

46

45

NHAI

Oct-01

Apr-04

Jan-06

211

38

Himatnagar - Chiloda (Near Ahmedabad) (UG-IV)

52

NHAI

Jun-03

Dec-05

Dec-05

175

39

Icchapuram - Korlam (AP-4B)

33

NHAI

Sep-01

Jan-04

Dec-05

143.05

40

Tada - Chennai (TN-1)

41.8

NHAI

Jun-01

Dec-03

Dec-05

233

41

Dehri - on-Sone - Aurangabad (TNHP/IV-D)

40

WB

Feb-01

Feb-04

Nov-05

242.61

42

Ongole - Kavali (AP-12)

72

NHAI

Aug-01

Apr-04

Sep-05

321.41

43

Tuni - Dharmavaram (AP-16)

47

Annuity

May-02

Nov-04

Aug-05

231.9

44

Korlam - Palasa (AP-4A)

29

NHAI

Sep-01

Jan-04

Aug-05

135.11

45

Palsit - Dankuni

65

Annuity

Oct-02

Feb-05

Jul-05

432.4

46

Bridges section (AP-6)

NHAI

Sep-01

Mar-04

Jul-05

79.14

47

Panagarh - Palsit

64.46

Annuity

Jun-02

Dec-04

Jun-05

350

48

Palasa - Srikakulam (AP-2)

74

NHAI

Jun-01

Jan-04

Jun-05

324

49

Surat (Chalthan) - Atul

79.6

ADB

Nov-00

Oct-03

Jun-05

504.6

50

Bridges Section (AP-20)

NHAI

Aug-01

Feb-04

May-05

131.33

51

Bhadrak - Chandikhole (OR-II)

75.5

NHAI

Dec-00

Dec-03

May-05

305.3

52

Kavali - Nellore (AP-11)

43.8

NHAI

May-01

Feb-04

May-05

181

18

76

53

Kolaghat - Kharagpur (WB-II)

60.45

NHAI

Dec-00

Dec-03

Mar-05

Total
Project
cost (Rs
Cr.)
375

54

Kesariaji - Ratanpur (UG-II)

48.4

NHAI

Oct-01

Apr-04

Mar-05

226.05

55

Mahapura (near Jaipur) - Kishangarh (6 Lane)

90.38

BOT

Apr-03

Sep-05

Mar-05

644

56

Mangalwar - Udaipur (KU-VI)

76

58.18

NHAI

Nov-01

May-04

Mar-05

170

57

Krishnagiri - Vaniyambadi (KR-1)

46

49

NHAI

Nov-01

May-04

Mar-05

195

58

Dharmavaram - Rajahmundry (AP-15)

53

Annuity

May-02

Nov-04

Mar-05

206

59

Divancheru (near Rajahmundry) - Gowthami (AP-17)

34.95

NHAI

Jun-01

Dec-03

Mar-05

130.8

60

Jaipur Bypass Phase II

34.7

NHAI

Dec-01

Jun-04

Mar-05

210

61

Bridges Section (AP-19)

2.45

NHAI

Aug-01

Feb-04

Mar-05

136.45

62

Champawati-Vishakhapatnam (AP-3)

46.2

NHAI

Jun-01

Feb-04

Feb-05

200

63

Ankapalli - Tuni

58.95

Annuity

May-02

Nov-04

Jan-05

283.2

64

Khaga - Kokhraj (TNHP/III-A)

43

WB

Feb-01

Jun-04

Jan-05

151.7

65

Sira - Tumkur

41.4

ADB

Mar-02

Aug-04

Jan-05

184

66

Maharastra Border-Belgaum

77

Annuity

Jun-02

Dec-04

Oct-04

332

67

Nellore Bypass

17.17

Annuity

Oct-02

Oct-04

Sep-04

143.2

68

Gulabpura - Bhilwara Bypass (KU-III)

164.25

69

Ahmedabad-Vadodara Exp.Way Phase-II

70

S.No. Stretch

Total
Funded
NH No. Length (In
By
km )

Date of
Date of Start completion as
per contract

Date of
completion

79

50

NHAI

Nov-01

May-04

Sep-04

NE1

50

SPV

Jun-01

Dec-03

May-04

365

Bhilwara Bypass - Chittorgarh (KU-IV)

79

66

NHAI

Nov-01

May-04

May-04

202.88

71

Gowthami - Gundugolanu (AP-18)

81.08

NHAI

Aug-01

Feb-04

Feb-04

323.35

72

Valelapet - Kanchipuram

36.2

NHAI

Sep-01

Mar-04

Jan-04

130

73

Udaipur - Kesariaji (UG-I)

62

NHAI

Oct-01

Apr-04

Jan-04

245.91

74

Hosur - Krishnagiri

45.4

NHAI

Jun-01

Jun-04

Jan-04

213

75

Chittorgarh - Mangalwar (KU-V)

76

48

NHAI

Nov-01

May-04

Jan-04

161.2

76

Atul - Kajali

38.6

ADB

Nov-00

Apr-03

Jan-04

174.59

77

Nasirabad - Gulabpura (KU-II)

79

55.87

NHAI

Nov-01

May-04

Jan-04

182.09

78

Kishangarh - Nasirabad (KU-I)

79A

36.23

NHAI

Nov-01

May-04

Jan-04

113.5

79

Nellore - Tada (AP-7)

110.52

BOT

Aug-01

Dec-03

Dec-03

621.35

80

Ratanpur - Himatnagar (UG-III)

54.6

NHAI

Nov-01

May-04

Dec-03

182.29

81

Sarole - Wathar (PS-2)

29

NHAI

Nov-01

Apr-04

Dec-03

118.93

82

Tumkur - Neelmangala

32.5

BOT

Jun-02

Nov-03

Dec-03

155

83

Wathar - Satara (PS-1)

35

NHAI

Jul-01

Dec-03

Dec-03

139

84

Kajali - Manor

57.4

ADB

Nov-00

Oct-03

Nov-03

192.71

85

Westerly Diversion

34.25

NHAI

Jun-00

Aug-02

Oct-03

109.38

86

Bridges section (AP-5)

NHAI

Aug-01

Feb-04

Sep-03

71

87

Vijayawada - Chilkaluripet Package III

23.78

JBIC

Mar-99

Mar-02

Jan-03

68

88

Vijayawada - Chilkaluripet Package I

25

JBIC

Mar-99

Mar-02

Jan-03

60

89

Vijayawada - Chilkaluripet Package II

32

JBIC

Mar-99

Mar-02

Jan-03

80

90

Chandikhole - Jagatpur

27.8

JBIC

Feb-00

Feb-03

Jan-03

103.35

91

Ahmedabad-Vadodara Exp. Way Phase-I

43.4

SPV

Aug-00

Dec-02

Dec-02

165

92

Hathipali - Hosur

16

NHAI

Dec-99

Aug-02

47

93

Mumbai Pune Expressway

10

MSRDC

Dec-01
By MoRT&H

94

Vijayawada - Chilkaluripet Package IV

2.88

JBIC

May-99

May-02

May-02

58

95

Sira Bypass

5.8

NHAI

Jul-00

Apr-02

Apr-02

19.32

96

Vijayawada - Rajamundry Section (near Eluru)

NHAI

Jun-00

Mar-02

Mar-02

19

97

Eluru-Vijayawada Package V

72

ADB

Dec-97

Jan-02

Jan-02

134

98

Barwa Adda - Barakar

43

ADB

Mar-99

Dec-01

Dec-01

120

99

Raniganj - Panagarh

42

ADB

Mar-99

Nov-01

137

100

Mumbai Pune Expressway

80

MSRDC

Nov-01
By MoRT&H

101

Dharwad - Hubli

29

MORTH

By MoRT&H

102

Manor - Baseeim- Creek Section

58

MORTH

By MoRT&H

103

Khambakti Ghat

MORTH

By MoRT&H

104

Barakar - Raniganj

33

WB

105

Gurgaon - Kotputli

126

ADB

Mar-99

Mar-01

Mar-01

251

106

Jaipur Bypass Phase I

14

NHAI

Sep-98

Jan-01

75

107

Jagatpur - Bhubneshwar

28

WB

Jan-01
By MoRT&H

By MoRT&H

S.No. Stretch

Total
Funded
NH No. Length (In
By
km )

Date of
Date of Start completion as
per contract

Date of
completion

Total
Project
cost (Rs
Cr.)

Feb-00

18

By MoRT&H

108

Baseeim-Creek Bridge - Dhaishar

MORTH

109

ROB at Kishangarh

BOT

110

Mathura - Agra

54

JBIC

Feb-00
By MoRT&H

111

Dankuni - NH-2/NH-6 Junction near Kolkata

MORTH

By MoRT&H

112

Vishakhapatanam - Ankapalli

38

MORTH

By MoRT&H

113

Delhi-Mathura

145

ADB

By MoRT&H

114

Bangalore - Hathipali

33

MORTH

By MoRT&H

115

Vadodara - Surat

152

MORTH

By MoRT&H

116

Delhi-Gurgaon

36

MORTH

By MoRT&H

117

Kotputli - Amer

86

ADB

By MoRT&H

118

Dhaishar - Mumbai

MORTH

By MoRT&H

119

Ahmedabad bypass

15

MORTH

By MoRT&H

120

Neelmangala - Bangalore

30

MORTH

By MoRT&H

Total :

5466.5

Mar-98

21739.2

List of terminated contracts

S.no
1
2
3
4
5

Stretch

NH No

Length

Category

Terminated
Date

DOLOMITE BERHADA.L.SUDARSHAN & CO.

18

GQ

Apr-06

BUMI-HIWAY-DDBL

50.8

GQ

Jan-04

Balance work awarded

on Dec-2006
Balance work awarded on
31/03/2006

CHINA COAL CONST.GROUP.CORP

59.02

GQ

Jun-04

Completed

YOU ONE-MAHARIA
Bhageeratha Engg. Ltd.& Ashwini
Construction Co.(JV)

48

GQ

Dec-04

Completed

13.6

GQ

Apr-05

UEM-ESSAR(JV)

56

GQ

Jan-07

77

GQ

Jan-07

62.64

GQ

Dec-07

Completed
Balance work reawarded on
Sep-2008
Balance work reawarded in
Sep-2008
Balance work reawarded in
Nov-2008

Contractor

Chitradurga Bypass
Ganjam - Icchapuram (OR-VIII)
(Balance work)
Shikohabad-Etawah
(GTRIP/I-B)
Srikakulam to Champawati
(AP-1)
Etawah Bypass
Haveri - Harihar

Annexure VIII

Harihar - Chitradurga

Balasore - Bhadrak (OR-III)

UEM-ESSAR(JV)
Elsamex - TWS - Shanker
Narayan Shetty (JV)

Sunakhala Ganjam (OR-VII)

Progressive Construction Ltd. Sticco (JV)

55.713

GQ

Apr-08

10
11

A. L. Sudershan & Co.

Bhageeratha Engg. Ltd.

4
6

13
1.732

GQ
GQ

May-08
Aug-08

Maharia - Raj (JV)

21.7

NS

Dec-04

You - One - Maharia (JV)

12.9

NS

Dec-04

14

Tumkur Bypass
Bridges Section (WB-III)
Six laning of Panchi Gujran to Kamaspur
(Sonepat) (NS-17/HR)
Eight laning of Haryana/ Delhi Border to
Mukaraba Chowk (NS-18/DL)
Eight laning of Haryana/ Delhi Border to
Mukaraba Chowk (NS-18/DL)

BJCL Brite(JV)

12.9

NS

Jan-09

15

Gundla
Pochampalli
to
Shivarampalli to Thondapalli
Balance Work

You One - Maharia

23.1

NS

Dec-04

16

Kanniyakumari-Panagudi(NS/32)

M/S PBA Infrastructure Ltd.

30.6

NS

Jan-07

17

Pathankot to Bhogpur (NS-38/PB)

Bridge & Roof

1A

40

NS

Sep-08

18

Lucknow Bypass (EW-15/UP)

Prakash-Atlanta(JV)

56 A&B

22.85

EW

Mar-03

19

Lucknow -Kanpur (EW/3A)

Rana Projects International Ltd

25

16

EW

Oct-11

12
13

Bowenpalli
(NS-23/AP)-

Present Status

Balance Work reawarded on Oct 2009

Balance work reawarded in
Feb-09
Terminated
Balance work reawarded on 18/10/2005
Balance work reawarded on
5/10/2005
Balance work awarded on
21.05.09
Balance work awarded on
30/06/2005
Balance work awarded in
Feb-2008
Balance work awarded in
Feb-2010
Balance work awarded in
Feb-2009
Balance work re-awarded and
substantially completed.

S.no

Stretch

Contractor
HSCL-SIPL(JV)
Progressive Construction Ltd.

NH No

Length

Category

Terminated
Date

29

EW

Mar-09

28

41.085

NS-EW

Feb-09

20

Wadner-Devdhari(NS-60/MH)

21

Deewapur- to UP/Bihar Border(LMNHP-9)

22

Haldia Port

CWHEC-HCIL(JV)

41

53

PC

Apr-07

23
24

Cochin Port
Tuticorin Port

Mecon-GEA Energy System(I) Ltd.(JV)

Mecon-GEA Energy System(I) Ltd.(JV)

47
7A

10
47.2

PC
PC

May-07
Nov-09

25

Chennai - Ennore Express Way

East Coast Construction& Industries Ltd.

SR

PC

Jun-08

26
27

Chennai - Ennore Express Way

Kelapur-Pimpalkhatti (NS 62)

Engineering Projects(I)Ltd.
Devi Enterprises Ltd

SR
7

15
22

PC
NS

Sep-08
May-10

Present Status
Terminated
Terminated. Termination revoked in
Sep, 2010
Balance work awarded on
29/04/2008
Balance work awarded on
28/08/2008
Balance Work reawarded on Feb 10
Terminated Projects merged with one
project under Phase I. The total project
length increased by 6 km ( 30.2 km).
Balance work re-awarded on Jan 2011.
Terminated

Annexure XI

Projects in Assam under NHDP Phase-II under East-West Corridor

Date of

Sl.
No.

Contract Stretch

Districts

Pkg
No.

NH
No.

Length
(km)

{AS-12}

Length
completed
(km)

Awarded
cost
( Rs in
Crore)

Physical
Progress
Achieved

Commencement
(as per contract)

Anticipated
date of
Completion

10

11

12

31C

30.00

18.10.05

31.12.11

18.90

218.38

49.06

{AS-11}

31C

30.00

06.10.05

31.12.11

3.30

199.41

36.37

STATE-ASSAM

Bijni - WB Border
( Km 30.0 -0.00)

Kokrajhar
(BTC)
2

Bijni -WB Border

(Km 60.0 -30.00)

Bijni -WB Border

(Km 93.0 - 60.00 )

Bongaigaon
& Chirang
(BTC)

{AS-10}

31C

33.00

06.10.05

31.12.11

11.30

248.69

41.43

Nalbari - Bijni
(Km. 983.00 961.50)

Bongaigaon

{AS-9}

31

21.50

03.11.05

31.07.11

18.17

131.23

84.22

Nalbari - Bijni
( Km. 1013.00 983.00)

Bongaigaon
&
Baska(BTC)

{AS-8}

31

30.00

03.11.05

30.11.11

26.65

187.08

84.03

Nalbari - Bijni
(Km. 1040.30 1013.00 )

Barpeta

(AS-7)

31

27.30

Oct-05

Dec-11

7.50

207.165

49.75

Nalbari -Bijni
(Km 1065.00 1040.30 )

Nalbari &
Baska (BTC)

(AS-6)

31

25.00

Nov-05

Dec-11

13.00

182.48

58.25

Guwahati -Nalbari
(km1093 -1065)

Kamrup
(Rural)

(AS-5)

31

28.00

Oct-05

Dec-11

11.50

192.87

60.42

Date of

Sl.
No.

Contract Stretch

Guwahati - Nalbari
(km1121- 1093)

Districts

Pkg
No.

NH
No.

Length
(km)

Kamrup
(Rural)

(AS-4)

Bridge over
10 Brahamputra river
(km 1121-1126)

11

Sonapur Guwahati
( Km 183.00 163.90)

Kamrup
(Metrol)

Dharamtul 12 Sonapur (km

205.00 -183.00)

Length
completed
(km)

Awarded
cost
( Rs in
Crore)

Physical
Progress
Achieved

Commencement
(as per contract)

Anticipated
date of
Completion

10

11

12

31

28.00

Dec-05

Dec-12

6.00

173.63

26.88

(AS-28)

31

5.00

Oct-06

Dec-12

0.00

238.4

38.08

{AS-3)

37

19.00

Sep-05

Dec-11

14.00

166.72

50.40

(AS-20)

37

22.00

Nov-05

March,12

7.50

137.75

43.56

13

Dharamtul Sonapurkm
( Km230.50-205.00
)

Morigaon

{AS-19}

37

25.500

25 Dec 05
(25 Nov 05)

Dec, 11

15.20

173.14

65.1

14

Nagaon- Dharamtul
i/c Nagaon Bypass
(km 262.725 255.00 )

Morigaon &
Nagaon

{AS-02}

37

24.500

26 Dec 05
(25 Nov 05)

Dec, 11

15.10

273.8

67.36

15

Daboka -Nagaon
( km 36.0 - 5.5 )

{AS-18}

37

23.663

16 Dec 05
(16 Nov 05)

April, 11

22.41

238.72

87.08

{AS-17}

36

30.362

26 Dec 05
(25 Nov 05)

Oct 11

24.60

202.18

81.5

{AS-16}

54

24.032

26 Dec 05
(25 Nov 05)

April, 11

24.03

198.65

96.78

{AS-15}

18.00

14.03.08

March,12

11.85

143.97

54.40

20.50

15.10.06

Dec,12

0.00

198.68

15.34

22.90

10.05.06

Dec-13

0.00

179.25

Foreclosed
bids under
evaluation

Nagaon 16 Dharamtul (km

255.05 -230.50 )

17

Nagaon

Lumding -Daboka
i/c 4.2km Daboka
Bypass
( km 22.0 - 2.40 )

Lanka - Lumding
18 I/c Lanka Bypass
(km 40.0 -22.00)
Nagaon

19

Maibang -Lumding
(Km 60.5 - 40)

{AS-27}

20

Maibang - Lumding
(Km 83.40 -60.50)

{AS-26}

54E

N.C. Hills

Date of

Sl.
No.

Contract Stretch

Districts

Pkg
No.

NH
No.

Length
(km)

Length
completed
(km)

Awarded
cost
( Rs in
Crore)

Physical
Progress
Achieved

12

Commencement
(as per contract)

Anticipated
date of
Completion

10

11

{AS-25}

27.60

05.11.06

Dec-13

0.00

226.16

{AS-24}

16.00

10.05.06

Dec-13

0.00

171.62

15.57

05.08.06

Oct, 12

8.50

317.11

54E

21

Maibang - Lumding
( Km 111 -83.40 )

N.C. Hills

22

Maibang - Lumding
(Km 127- 111 )

Narimbanglo 23 Maibang
(Km 140.70 - 127)

{AS-23}

{AS-22}

Harangajo -Jatinga
25 ( Km 190.587 165.4 )

27

Silchar -Balachera
(Km275.0-306.54)

(Foreclosed
and reawarded in
Dec, 2010)
(Foreclosed
and reawarded in
Dec, 2010)

N.C. Hills

Jatinga 24 Narimbanglo (Km

165.4 - 140.7)

Balachera to
26 Harangajo section
(Km 244 to 190.58)

54

54

23.38

{AS-21}

54

25.19

Cachar
(21.987 Km)
&
NC
Hills (3.20
Km)

AS-14

54

25.19

Cachar

(AS-1)

54

25.88

30.12.06

30.12.06

Dec, 13

Dec, 13

0.00

0.00

241.53

253.09

47.06

Foreclosed
under process
of re-award
bids to be
received on
14.3.2011

Foreclosed
under process
of re-award
bids to be
received on
14.3.2011

Work yet to be awarded. DPR completed, however this stretch being

widened to 2L paved shoulder by the Ministry & 4-lane widening shall
be taken up later on by NHAI, PIU-Silchar.

17.09.04

June, 11

13.00

115.86

60.50

Annexure X
SUMMARY STATUS OF PROJECTS UNDERTAKEN BY NHAI FOR MAJOR PORTS CONNECTIVITY
Sl.
No.

Name of Work

Length
(km)

1.

West Bengal
Haldia
Port
Connectivity
(NH41) from Kolaghat to
Haldia
in
West
Bengal

52.2
(NH41)
6.125
HPL Link
Rd

Orissa
Paradip
Port
Connectivity
(NH5A)
from
Chandikhole
to
Paradip in Orissa
Andhra Pradesh
Visakhapatnam
Port
Connectivity
(Port
Road)
in
Andhra Pradesh
Tamil Nadu
Chennai-Ennore
Port Connectivity in
Tamil Nadu
Phase-II
: 9 km
(TPP Road)

77

2.

3.

4.

Phase-III-15 km
(MoRR + IRR + 1.6
km EE + 3 groynes
Phase-IV : 6 km
Balance EE

Project
Cost (Rs.
in Crore)
273
(revised Rs.
522 crore)

Contractor/
Supervision
Consultant
M/s
Dineshchandra /

Date of
Commen
cement
Sept, 08

Scheduled
/Likely
Completion
Sept,
2010/May
2011

Cum. %
Progress till
Feb.11
66.62

Feb., 04

Feb 07/
May2010

Completed

June, 02

Dec., 04

M/s CES

500
Revised

M/s HCC /
M/s LASA

12.5

116

M/s M. Venkata
Rao /
M/s LASA

Phase-I :
Sea
Protection
Work
9 km

Phase-I
24.6

39.2

15 km

Phase-III :
76.76

6 km

Balance for
award

Present status

After termination in Apr., 07 of earlier contract,

Agreement signed with M/s Dineshchandra on
01.09.08 for Rs. 295.83 crore and work
commenced on 30.09.08. Schedule date of
completion 29-9-2010.
Earlier contract agreement terminated on 42%
progress.
Work completed in May 2010 however Tolling
started w.e.f. 04.07.2009 after substantial
completion in Jun 2009.

Completed (toll collection commenced on 15.12.2006). DPR by

M/S STUP Consultants for Ph II work is in progress
Phase-II work is being funded by port only.
Completed in June, 06

M/s RDS Project

Ltd./TNRDC

June, 03

June, 05

M/s ECCI /
TNRDC

May, 06

Contract
terminated

11

M/s EPIL /
TNRDC

Sept., 07

Contract
terminated

Nil

LA process by Govt. of Tamilnadu delayed the

work and Contract terminated with mutual
consent on 24.06.08.
EPIL (PSU) approached CoD on termination.
The matter is yet to be settled.

TNSCB has taken up R&R work. The

construction of dwelling units is complete and the
PAPs are being shifted.
The works in Phase- II, III and IV have been combined. As the project cost has increased from Rs. 309 crore to Rs. 600 crore, NHAI Board directed to obtain
th
confirmation of enhanced equity/debt contribution from SPV partners. Bids for civil work costing Rs. 267.47 crores were received and opened on 25 Nov. 2010. M/S
Coastal-SPL (JV) has been found as the lowest bidder and awarded the work by issue of LOA on 24 Dec 2010.

Sl.
No.

Name of Work

5.

6.

7.

Length
(km)

Project
Cost (Rs.
in Crore)

Contractor/
Supervision
Consultant

Elevated Road from

Gate No. 10 to
Maduravoyal on NH4
under
NHDP
Phase VII on BOT

19

1655
(1345+310)

M/s
ChennaiElevated
Tollway Co.Ltd.

Ennore-Thatchur
New Four Lane
Road from Northern
gate of Ennore Port
to Thachur (NH-5)
Under NHDP Phase
VII Through PPP on
DBFOT Toll Basis

21.5

278.54

Tuticorin
Port
Connectivity Project
on NH 7A
in
Tamilnadu
Kerala
Cochin
Port
Connectivity to ICTT,
Vallarpadam, Cochin

47.2

231.2

M/s TransstroyOJSC (JV) /

SPAN

17.2

571

4-laning of NH-47
from km 348.4 to km
358.75 Cochin.

10.40

193

Karnataka
New Mangalore Port
Connectivity Project
on NH 17, 13 & 48 in
Karnataka

37.5

196.5

Date
of
Commenc
ement

Scheduled
/Likely
Completion

Cum. %
Progress till
Feb.11

April, 2010

April, 2012

16

Suncom-Soma
(JV) / LASA

Sept 2007

Feb., 2010 /
Dec 2012

100

RDS-CVCC (JV)
/Dalal MottMac
Donald

Nov 2008

IRCON /
SNC-SAI (JV)

June 2005

Apr/Dec,
2010
Dec2007/
Mar 2011

100

83

Present status

Work awarded to M/s soma Enterprise Limited

on 06.01.09 with grant of Rs 499.30 Crore, which
is 37.12% of total estimated cost of Rs 1345
Crore. Concession agreement signed on
18.5.2009. Financial close and appointed date
has been declared as 14.09.2010..
The project envisages construction of a new 4lane Road from km 0+000 to km 21+150 from
Ennore Port to Thachur on NH-5 so as to provide
direct access controlled connectivity from Ennore
Port to NH-5. SFC proposal earlier sent to
Ministry on 30.04.2010 has been modified due to
exclusion of Link to TPP Road and been
submitted to the Ministry. Declaration of this road
as National Highway is under consideration by
Planning Commission. RFQ has been received
on 27.01.2011 and same is under evaluation.
The contract was terminated on 08 May 2009 at
24% progress. Work re-awarded and balance
work is under progress, as per schedule.
2-lane connectivity completed in Oct. 2010.
Cost of the project revised due to additional work
of ground improvement in reclaimed area.
For revised cost a Committee headed by AS&FA
was set up in the Ministry and Committee has
given its recommendations. The proposal for
revised cost is being put up before PIB by the
Ministry.
Completed on 31.12.2010. Tolling to be
started soon.
Four laning of 14 km. has been completed out of
15.5 km on NH-17. Poor progress of Contractor
and delay in land acquisition & utility shifting has
delayed the completion of work.

Sl.
No
.

Name of Work

Length
(km)

Project
Cost (Rs.
in Crore)

Contractor/
Supervision
Consultant

Date of
Commen
cement

Scheduled
/Likely
Completion

10

11

Goa
Mormugao
Port
Connectivity on NH
17 B in Goa

18.3

145

KMC/ Aarvee

Oct 2009

Oct 2011

Maharashtra
JNPT
Package-I:
Four laning of NH 4B
& NH 4

30

159

Thakur-MhatreUnity (JV) / STUP

Feb 2002

July, 2004

JNPT
Package-II:
Four laning of SH 54
&
Aamra
Marg
including
Panvel
Creek Bridge)

14.4

143

Jog-Shirke
STUP

Nov 2004

May, 2007

279

Implementation of the interchange through SPV at a cost of Rs. 279 crore was approved by NHAI Board in its
meeting held on 25.03.2008. DPR has been prepared by M/S Aarvee Associates / GAD approval of ROB from
Railway is awaited.

JNPT Package-III:
Construction of two
interchanges
at
Aamra Marg with
NH- 4B near Gavan
Phata and NH- 4B
with SH-54 Near
JNPT

(JV)/

Cum. %
Progress till
Feb.11

Present status

13.1 km completed in 2004 and bal 5.2 km was

held up for R&R by State Government. The
balance work including Fly over cum ROB to
Gate No 9 has been re-awarded and is in
progress.
The encroachers in last 350 meters of 5.2 Km.
stretch have not accepted the rehabilitation plan
and are the main obstacle for completion of
balance work.
Completed in July, 05 and Toll collection commenced in Aug,
2005.
7.16

Substantially
Completed
in Dec 2008

Land Acquisition by CIDCO delayed the work

and LA process for 2.3 km is still on. Substantial
Completion issued for completed stretch as on
31 Dec 08 the work has been foreclosed.
The toll collection in completed stretch has
started from Nov. 2010.

As decided in Mar 2010 SPV Board meeting, a Feasibility Study and Detailed Project Report for 6/8 laning of
NH-4B, NH-4, SH-54 and Amra Marg on boundaries of proposed Navi Mumbai International Airport in the State of
Maharashtra to be executed as BOT (Toll) on DBFOT Pattern. M/s STUP Consultant who are the feasibility cum
DPR Consultant to give the Draft DPR by 15 Mar 2011.

Kandla Port Connectivity has been completed in July, 2002.

Mumbai Port connectivity has been dropped since the alignment passed through Salt Pan Areas and same is to be undertaken by Port itself.
Kolkata Port connectivity also dropped since the alignment passed through Defence area and the land was not made available for the work.

MINUTES OF SIXTH SITTING OF THE ESTIMATES COMMITTEE

(2009-2010)
The Committee sat on Tuesday, the 22nd September, 2009 from 1445 hrs. to 1755
hrs.
PRESENT
Shri Francisco Sardinha

Chairman

MEMBERS
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.

Smt. Harsimrat Kaur Badal

Shri Sanjay Singh Chauhan
Shri Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury
Shri Bhakta Charan Das
Shri T.K.S. Elangovan
Dr. Sanjay Jaiswal
Shri M. Krishnaswamy
Smt. Ranee Narah
Shri Prabodh Panda
Shri Ravindra Kumar Pandey
Shri Kabindra Purkayastha
Shri Jagdish Singh Rana
Shri M. Sreenivasulu Reddy
Shri S. Semmalai
Shri Madan Lal Sharma
Shri Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh
Dr. Raghuvansh Prasad Singh
Shri Lalji Tandon
Shri Manish Tewari
Shri K.C. Venugopal
SECRETARIAT

1.
2.
3.

Shri U.S. Saxena

Shri Bhupesh Kumar
Smt. Manju Chaudhary

Joint Secretary
Director
Deputy Secretary

WITNESSES
MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Shri Brahm Dutt

Shri Nirmaljit Singh
Shri Vijay Chhiber
Shri A.V. Sinha
Shri Saroj Kumar Dash
Shri P.K. Tripathi

Secretary (RT&H)
DG(RD) & SS
AS&FA
ADG
Joint Secretary
Joint Secretary
2/-

-2-

7.
8.
9.
10.

Shri V.L. Patankar

Shri Ashok Kumar
Shri P. Sudhir Kumar
Shri Anand Prakash

Chief Engineer
Chief Engineer
CCA
Director

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA (NHAI)

11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.

Shri Brijeshwar Singh,

Shri K.S. Money
Dr. A. Didar Singh
Shri S.I. Patel
Shri S.K. Puri
Shri S.K. Nirmal
Shri V.K. Sharma

Chairman, NHAI
Member (A)
Member (F)
Member (P)
Member (P)
CGM
CGM

2.

At the outset, the Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and

representatives of Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to the sitting of the Committee.

3.

Thereafter, the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways briefed the

Committee on the subject National Highways Development Project including implementation

of Golden Quadrilateral. The Members of the Committee raised questions on various issues
involved in the subject and the representatives of the Ministry replied to the same. The
Secretary was requested to furnish replies in writing to the questions for which answers were
not readily available at the time of briefing.

4.

A verbatim record of the proceedings has been kept.

The Committee then adjourned to meet again on 23rd September, 2009.

MINUTES OF THE TWENTIETH SITTING OF THE ESTIMATES COMMITTEE (2009-2010)

The Committee sat on Tuesday, the 30th March, 2010 from 1500 hrs. to 1800 hrs.
PRESENT
Shri Francisco Sardinha Chairman

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

MEMBERS
Shri Sanjay Singh Chauhan
Shri T.K.S. Elangovan
Dr. Sanjay Jaiswal
Shri Ramesh Jigajinagi
Shri P. Karunakaran
Shri Mohinder Singh Kaypee
Shri M. Krishnaswamy
Shri Prabodh Panda
Shri M. Sreenivasulu Reddy
Shri Madan Lal Sharma
Shri Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh
Dr. Raghuvansh Prasad Sigh
Shri Sushil Kumar Singh
Shri Lalji Tandon
Shri Manish Tewari
Shri K.C. Venugopal
SECRETARIAT

1
2

Shri U.S. Saxena

Shri Bhupesh Kumar

Joint Secretary
Director

WITNESSES
MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Shri Brahm Dutt

Shri A.V. Sinha
Shri Vijay Chhiber
Shri S.K. Puri
Shri P.K. Tripathi

Secretary (RT&H)
DG (RD) & SS
Addl. Secy. & FA
ADG
Joint Secretary

NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA

6.
7.

Shri Brijeshwar Singh

Shri Rajiv Yadav

Chairman
Member (A)

8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

Shri V.L. Patankar

Shri S.I. Patel
Shri B.N. Singh
Dr. J.N. Singh
Shri S.K. Nirmal
Shri M.P. Sharma
Shri V.K. Sharma

Member (T)
Member (P)
Member (T)
Member (F)
CGM (Coord)
CGM (Coord)
CGM

2.

***

***

***

***

***

3.

***

***

***

***

***

4.

Thereafter, the representatives of Ministry of Road Transport & Highways were called in.

The Chairman welcomed them to the sitting of Committee.

5.

The representatives of the Ministry gave oral evidence before the Committee on the

subject National Highways Development Projects including implementation of Golden

Quadrilateral. The Members of the Committee raised questions on various issues relating to
the subject and the officials replied to the same. The Secretary was requested to furnish replies
in writing to the questions for which answers were not readily available during the course of
evidence.

6.

A verbatim record of the proceedings pertaining to the evidence of Ministry of Road

Transport and Highways has been kept.

The Committee then adjourned.

MINUTES OF THE TWENTY-FIRST SITTING OF THE ESTIMATES COMMITTEE (2009-2010)

The Committee sat on Wednesday, the 7th April, 2010 from 1500 hrs. to 1800 hrs.
PRESENT
Shri Francisco Sardinha Chairman

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

MEMBERS
Shri Sanjay Singh Chauhan
Shri T.K.S. Elangovan
Shri Mohinder Singh Kaypee
Shri M. Krishnaswamy
Smt. Ranee Narah
Shri Prabodh Panda
Shri C. Rajendran
Shri Jagdish Singh Rana
Shri M. Sreenivasulu Reddy
Shri S. Semmalai
Shri Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh
Shri Sushil Kumar Singh
Shri Lalji Tandon
Shri K.C. Venugopal
SECRETARIAT

1
2
3.

Shri U.S. Saxena

Shri Bhupesh Kumar
Smt. Juby Amar

Joint Secretary
Director
Under Secretary

WITNESSES
MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Shri Brahm Dutt

Shri A.V. Sinha
Shri Vijay Chhiber
Shri S.K. Puri
Shri P. Sudhir Kumar
Shri P.K. Tripathi

Secretary (RT&H)
DG (RD) & SS
Addl. Secy. & FA
ADG
Pr. CCA
Joint Secretary

NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA

7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
2.

Shri Brijeshwar Singh

Shri V.L. Patankar
Shri S.I. Patel
Shri B.N. Singh
Dr. J.N. Singh
Shri S.K. Nirmal
Shri V.K. Sharma
Shri A.S. Verma
Shri. S. Manivasagam

Chairman
Member (T)
Member (P)
Member (T)
Member (F)
CGM (Coord)
CGM
GM (P&IS)
Manager (P&IS)

At the outset, the Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and

representatives of Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to the sitting of the Committee.

3.

Thereafter, the

Committee took further oral evidence of the representatives of the

Ministry on the subject National Highways Development Projects including implementation of

Golden Quadrilateral. The Members of the Committee raised questions on various issues
relating to the subject and the officials replied to the same. The Secretary was requested to
furnish replies in writing to the questions for which answers were not readily available during the
course of evidence.

4.

A verbatim record of the proceedings has been kept.

The Committee then adjourned.

MINUTES OF THIRTEENTH SITTING OF COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES (2010-2011)

The Committee sat on Friday, the 24th September, 2010 from 1100 hrs. to 1330 hrs.
Shri Francisco Sardinha Chairman
MEMBERS
2

Shri Bhakta Charan Das

Shri Sanjay Jaiswal

Shri Chandrakant Khaire

Shri M. Krishnaswamy

Shri Sanjeev Ganesh Naik

Shri Prabodh Panda

Smt. Rani Narah

Shri Ravindra Kumar Pandey

10

Smt. Yashodhara Raje Scindia

11

Shri S. Semmalai

12

Shri Arjun Charan Sethi

13

Shri Brijbhushan Sharan Singh

14

Shri Sushil Kumar Singh

15

Shri Manish Tewari

16

Shri K.C. Venugopal

SECRETARIAT
1.

Smt. Anita B. Panda -

Additional Director

2.

Smt. Juby Amar

Deputy Secretary

WITNESSES
Ministry of Road Transport & Highways
1. Shri R.S. Gujral

Secretary

2. Shri Vijay Chibber

AS&FA

3. Shri P. Sudhir Kr.

Pr. CCA

4. Shri S.K. Puri

ADG

5. Shri S.K.Dash

Joint Secretary
Page 1 of 2

6. Shri P.K. Tripathi

Joint Secretary

7. Shri Sanjay Bandopadhyaya

Joint Secretary

8. Shri Anand Prakash

Director (RT)

National Highways of India (NHAI)

2.

1.

Shri Brijeshwar Singh

Chairman, NHAI

2.

Shri Rajiv Yadav

Member (Admn.)

3.

Dr. J.N.Singh

Member (Finance)

4.

Shri S.L. Patel

Member (Project)

5.

Shri V.L. Patankar

Member (Tech.)

6.

Shri R.K. Singh

CGM (Tech)

7.

Shri M.P. Sharma

CGM (Tech)

8.

Shri V. K. Sharma

CGM (LA)

At the outset, the Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and representatives

of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to the sitting of the Committee.

3.

Thereafter, the Committee took oral evidence of the representatives of the Ministry. The

Members of the Committee sought clarification on various issues relating to the subject to which
the representatives of the Ministry responded. The Honble Chairman requested the Secretary,
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to furnish replies in writing to the questions for which
answers were not readily available during the course of evidence.

4.

The Committee decided to hold the next sitting on 1st October, 2010.

5.

A verbatim record of the proceedings has been kept.

The Committee then adjourned.

Page 2 of 2

MINUTES OF TWENTY FIFTH SITTING OF COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES (2010-2011)

The Committee sat on Thursday, the 10th March, 2011 from 1500 hrs. to 1740 hrs.
PRESENT
Shri Francisco Sardinha Chairman
MEMBERS
1.

Smt. Harsimrat Kaur Badal

2.

Shri Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury

3.

Shri Bhakta Charan Das

4.

Shri Milind Deora

5.

Dr. Sanjay Jaiswal

6.

Shri Ramesh Jigajinagi

7.

Shri Chandrakant Khaire

8.

Shri M. Krishnaswamy

9.

Dr. Sanjeev Ganesh Naik

10.

Shri Prabodh Panda

11.

Shri Ravindra Kumar Pandey

12.

Shri M. Sreenivasulu Reddy

13.

Smt. Yashodhara Raje Scindia

14.

Shri Sushil Kumar Singh

15.

Shri Lalji Tandon

16.

Shri Manish Tewari

SECRETARIAT

1.

Shri P. K. Grover

Joint Secretary

2.

Smt. Juby Amar

Deputy Secretary

WITNESSES
Ministry of Road Transport & Highways
1.

Shri R.S. Gujral

Secretary &
Chairman, NHAI

2.

Shri Vijay Chibber

AS & FA

3.

Shri R.P. Indoria

DG (RD)

4.

Shri S.K. Dash

JS (T&G)
Page 1 of 2

5.

Shri Raghav Chandra

JS (Highways)

6.

Shri Sanjay Bandhopadhyaya

JS (LA&C)

7.

Shri Kamlesh Kumar

CE(PIC)

8.

Shri S.K. Marwah

CE (P-1)

9.

Shri K.C. Verkayachan

CE (P-7)

10.

Shri A.K. Shrivastava

SE (PIC)

11.

Shri Sudip Choudhary

SE (Plg.)

12.

Shri P. Srinivas

SE (Mon)

National Highways of India (NHAI)

2.

1.

Shri Rajiv Yadav

Member (Admn.)

2.

Dr. J.N.Singh

Member (Finance)

3.

Shri B.N. Singh

Member (Project)

4.

Shri V.L. Patankar

Member (Tech.)

At the outset, the Honble Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee to the sitting

of the Committee.
3.
4.

***

***

***

***

Thereafter, representatives of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways were

ushered in.

5.

After formal welcome by the Honble Chairman, the Committee took oral evidence of the

representatives of the Ministry on the subject National Highways Development Project including
implementation of Golden Quadrilateral. The Members of the Committee sought clarification on
various issues relating to the subject to which the representatives of the Ministry responded. The
Honble Chairman requested the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to furnish
replies in writing to the questions for which answers were not readily available during the course of
evidence.

6.

A verbatim record of the proceedings has been kept.

The Committee then adjourned.

Page 2 of 2

MINUTES OF TWENTY EIGHTH SITTING OF COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES (2010-2011)

The Committee sat on Tuesday, the 26th April, 2011 from 1115 hrs. to 1325 hrs.
PRESENT
Shri Francisco Sardinha Chairman
MEMBERS
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.

Shri Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury

Shri Bhakta Charan Das
Shri T.K.S. Elangovan
Dr. Sanjay Jaiswal
Shri Ramesh Jigajinagi
Shri P. Karunakaran
Shri Chandrakant Khaire
Shri M. Krishnaswamy
Dr. Sanjeev Ganesh Naik
Shri Prabodh Panda
Shri Jagdish Singh Rana
Smt. Yashodhara Raje Scindia
Shri S. Semmalai
Shri Madan Lal Sharma
Shri Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh
Dr. Raghuvansh Prasad Singh
Shri Sushil Kumar Singh
Shri Manish Tewari
SECRETARIAT

1.

Shri P. K. Grover

2.

Smt. Anita B. Panda -

Additional Director

3.

Smt. Juby Amar

Deputy Secretary

Joint Secretary

WITNESSES
***

***

***

***

2.

At the outset, the Chairman welcomed the Members to the sitting of the Committee.

3.

Thereafter the Committee took up for consideration the draft Report on the subject National

Highways Development Project including implementation of Golden Quadrilateral pertaining to the

Ministry of Road Transport & Highways.

4.

The Committee adopted the draft Report with minor modifications suggested by the

Members of the Committee.

5.

The Committee then authorized the Chairman to finalize the Report in the light of

modifications suggested and present the same to the Honble Speaker under Direction 71A of the
Direction by the Speaker, Lok Sabha. The Committee also decided to present the Report to
Parliament in the coming Monsoon session.

6.

***

***

***

***

7.

***

***

***

***

8.

***

***

***

***

The Committee then adjourned.