Bengaluru’s proposed overhaul of its solid waste management system has triggered a major political row, with leader of the opposition R Ashoka alleging that the tender process for integrated solid waste management (ISWM) involves irregularities and a kickback. The tender is valued at Rs 39,437 crore over 35 years. Chief minister DK Shivakumar has countered Ashoka by alleging that the latter is operating on behalf of the “garbage mafia”. Here’s what you need to know:What’s BJP’s allegation?On June 10, Ashoka filed complaints with the Lokayukta and the governor, alleging large-scale irregularities in the tender process. The 30-year contract (extendable by five years) has been awarded to Delhi-based MSW Solutions Ltd, which is said to be a wholly owned subsidiary of Hyderabad-based Ramky Group. Union minister Shobha Karandlaje had separately written to chief secretary Shalini Rajneesh on May 30, demanding the tender be immediately suspended and a CBI inquiry ordered. The Lokayukta has assured immediate action. Ashoka has alleged that the tender involved kickbacks worth Rs 10,000 crore.Garbage conundrum■ 5,500-6,000 tonnes: Solid waste every day as conceded by authoritiesAshoka, citing official documents, breaks up the current expenditure in managing this waste as follows:■ ≈Rs 1,340 crore: Total money spent on managing this waste annually— Rs 514 crore on collection and transportation— Rs 380 crore on processing and disposal— Rs 444 crore on salaries for pourakarmikas■ The city manages this through Bengaluru Solid Waste Management Ltd (BSWML), established in Nov 2021, which called and managed the ISWM tender.The tender: Troubled 3-round historyThe current project’s DPR was prepared by RITES, examined by BSWML’s technical committee, and approved at its 13th board meeting — fixing the tipping fee (the per-tonne processing charge) at Rs 2,998.The first tender call drew zero bids. In the second round, three bidders came forward for both North and South packages and were all declared technically disqualified. “In the third round, the same three bidders were found technically qualified — with no publicly disclosed change in eligibility criteria,” Ashoka and Karandlaje have alleged.Both their complaints describe this reversal as evidence of manipulation and allege that BSWML appears to have relaxed the conditions itself, a power ordinarily belonging to the finance department.The cabinet approval was allegedly pushed through just before former CM Siddaramaiah stepped down. As per the opposition, several ministers and the finance department had raised objections. After DK Shivakumar became CM, a review committee was dissolved and replaced with a new one, which was given just seven days, down from 15, to examine the contract.Financial scaleAt existing rates, 30 years of waste processing would cost around Rs 6,117 crore. Under the new contract, it rises to Rs 39,437 crore, placing an additional burden of Rs 33,320 crore on taxpayers. “A 5% annual escalation clause compounds this further, potentially pushing the tipping fee to Rs 9,297 per tonne by 2056. The finance department recommended capping escalation at 2.5% and reducing the tenure to 10 years. Both packages have been awarded to the same company, at rates approximately 19% above originally approved estimates,” Ashoka has alleged.Key allegationsThe complaints and official letters raise several specific charges. The process was allegedly designed to favour Ramky. They claim BBMP (now GBA) itself had terminated a contract with it in 2016 over mismanagement of the Mavallipura landfill.The finance department formally objected on record to the contract length, the escalation rate, awarding both packages to one vendor, and accepting bids more than 10% above estimated value — all of which a May 2022 govt circular says should trigger mandatory re-tendering.These objections were overridden. Land is being acquired from a private firm at nearly Rs 1.6 crore per acre, above the legally determined rate and over finance department objections. The project site also contains 4-5 lakh tonnes of legacy waste, raising the prospect of future cost claims by the contractor.
