27 Jun 2017  |   07:31am IST

Parking slots yet to be earmarked

Motorists have been at the receiving end after the pay-parking contract in Panjim ended on April 30

Team Herald


PANJIM: Motorists may have to wait a while to breathe a sigh relief or find that elusive parking spot in the melee of vehicular mayhem in the city as the initial steps towards earmarking the parking spaces has yet to be taken.

Motorists have been at the receiving end after the pay-parking contract ended on 30 April and since then parking in the city has become a nightmare. According to CCP Mayor Surendra Furtado the tender for earmarking the spaces on the city roads has been presented.

"CCP has issued tenders for thermoplastic paint markings across the city which will include marking the spaces for four-wheeler and two-wheeler parking areas. Due to technical issues of differential amount, the file has been moved to the PWD for its approval before awarding the tender," he emphasised.

According to initial estimates, about 400 cars and around 900 two-wheelers can be accommodated on city roads. However, a final figure can be drawn only after the final markings. 

One of the issues raised by the previous contractor for city pay-parking was the defined earmarking of spaces. Ironically, the 2016-17 contract seemed inclined to providing benefit to the contractor and CCP Commissioner Dipak Desai has been on record emphasising that bearing the 2016 experience, the Corporation will first envisage a relook of the policy before taking a final call. Incidentally the CCP had faced lot of flak for the manner in which the pay parking contract was awarded.

The CCP had commenced pay-parking tender process at 38 places in the city, as notified by the North Goa Collector in October 2015 and subsequently the contract was allotted to M/s Straight Deal Services on 2nd May 2016 which expired on 30th April 2017.

Interestingly, while the contract was initially awarded for an amount of Rs 63.01 lakhs, providing concessions based on the grievances raised by the contractor, the CCP asked the contractor to pay Rs 2.50 lakhs for the first six months instead of Rs 5,25,083 per month.

However, even after the CCP reduced the contract amount by 16.5 lakhs, from Rs 63.01 lakhs to Rs 46,50,498, the contractor paid the CCP only Rs 8 lakhs in four instalments of Rs 2 lakhs each. 

The CCP further claimed the Bank Guarantee of Rs 8,30,100 and eventually recovered a total amount of Rs 16,30,100.

IDhar UDHAR

Iddhar Udhar