Row builds before school buildings can take shape

It all started in August last year,when the project director of Haryana Prathmik Shiksha Pariyojna Parishad (HPSPP) issued an advertisement in newspapers,saying that the Department of School Education proposes to construct a number of model schools and girls’ hostels and would hold a limited design competition for selecting architectural designs.

It was decided that awards of Rs 1 lakh,Rs 70,000 and Rs 40,000 would be given to first,second and third prize winners,respectively. A jury of eminent persons would review and award the entries,and its word would be final,said the adv.

The jury was constituted comprising among others S S Bhatti,former principal of Chandigarh College of Architecture (CCA),and Pradeep Bhagat,the incumbent principal of the college. A meeting was held and the jury reportedly selected the winners.

However,the participating architects alleged that the department did not declare the result. They said they were invited again and asked to give presentations,which they did. The department arbitrarily decided to appoint another committee to select the architects afresh,but neither the results about their designs nor the names of thenewly-selected firms were intimated to them,they said.

An architect said some time ago he saw a tender notice for construction of the buildings,which means the final selection was done,but not made public. Jatinder Singh,a builder who filed an RTI application with the department to know the outcome,said though he was provided a list of the shortlisted firms,but details of the winners and the new committee were not provided.

Sources said two firms,Saakar Foundation and Designers’ Consortium,were among the shortlisted. Lakhbir Singh of the Designers’ Consortium said he had also filed an RTI application,and was told that no one has been selected.

Jury member Bhatti said they had selected the firms and he had made everyone sign on the papers. “In fact,I don’t let the jury members break for lunch or tea before signing the papers,so that no hobnobbing takes place outside,” he said.

Another jurist Pradeep Bhagat said he was formally invited to take part in the selection and they had shortlisted three architecture firms. However,both of them said they were not informed about the constitution of the committee for fresh selections.

HPSPP Project Director M S Brar said,“Ultimately,no winner was declared as nobody was found good enough,therefore,no prize was awarded.”

There was no relation between the design competition and the selection by the committee,he said. “The competition was held to get maximum designs from the market,and a jury was appointed. This was an innovative step introduced for the first time,” he said.

Asserting that there was no pressure to select particular firms,he said those who have not got adequate information under the RTI Act could file an appeal with him. About the committee,he said it was constituted under the financial commissioner.

Reacting to Brar’s statement,Surinder Bahga,chairman of the Indian Institute of Architects who is also associated with Saakar Foundation,said the advertisement clearly indicated the eligibility conditions,and most of the architects had 10-15 times more experience than asked for.

“Firms had ISO certifications,registration with the World Bank,Bureau of Energy Efficiency and other state and national organisations. How can they arbitrarily say that none was found eligible? Jury member Dr SS Bhatti has three PhDs and nearly 50 years’ experience,and Bhagat is the principal of the CCA. When such eminent professionals selected designs,why their report was not implemented?

If the department says designs were invited to have ideas,then why award money was not paid. This is violation of the Architects Act,1972. They are exploiting architects,” he said.