editorial:
Poor workmanship, the bottom-rung even by the nexus-compromised construction practises, is obviously to blame for the retaining wall collapse at the government college, Gangtok. Three vehicles parked along the wall have been totalled, and even though this is a substantial material loss, the shocking substandard work would have extracted a much larger toll if the collapse had occurred during daytime. There could have been students caught under the debris. Officially, the blame will not be imposed on the quality of work and red tape will be rolled out in the form of an enquiry and investigation [if one is considered]. Even after that, the incident will be looked into in isolation- as one of a retaining wall collapse.
Such a myopic ‘investigation’, if there is one, will be inexcusably wrong because the wall collapse is only one manifestation of everything that is wrong with the entire building. The building, known to the students as the NEC Block, started off with defective planning, poor survey and incomplete investigation as the latest CAG Report has aptly laid bare. The Human Resource Development Department began in October 2004 by seeking Rs. 2.65 crore from the North East Council for “Infrastructural Upgradation of Sikkim Government College, Tadong”. Of this, the civil works component was Rs. 1.23 crore and “allied works” were pegged at Rs. 1.42 crore. When the work was put to tender, the lowest bidder, in keeping with a pattern unique to Sikkim, offered to do the work at 42.22% above the estimate, magnanimously scaling down to 38.66% above on the condition that he was also awarded work to supply furniture, lab equipment, computers and even books for the library [housed in the new facility]. The Department then revised the Rs. 2.65 crore project to Rs. 3.15 crore to fit in aspects like architectural design fee, change in roof style, change in construction site, electrification, sanitation, underground water diversion etc. How these aspects were left out from the original DPR is confounding.
Be that as it may, when the building was completed, CAG auditors found “visible seepage” from the ceiling of the library, worn out floor and stairs, three classrooms designed in such a way that posts blocked students from even being able to see the blackboard. The toilet was without water supply and just about everything required in a college block was deficient in this construction. In November 2010, the Department came on record stating that it would take corrective measures. The file is probably still being processed because even as the obvious failings of the construction have been obvious for a while, now, with the collapse of the retaining wall from its base, even the structural safety of the concrete contraption has been called into question.
The retaining wall has collapsed in a debris of dehydrated cement flakes, loose earth and wet soil. The foundation beams stand exposed, and even to an untrained eye, this cannot be safe, and although the blue tarpaulin covers might keep water away from seeping in or prying eyes from making noise, they cannot reinforce the structure. At least till expert opinion can be sought on the incident, the building has to be declared out of bounds and students kept away from it. The retaining wall might have been constructed superficially, but its job is obviously not just cosmetic- it is ‘retaining’ something up. When it collapses under its weight, what does it say about the stability of the building constructed above it? The contractor and the Department have tried their best to make the building student-unfriendly, now it is perhaps time for better sense to prevail and keep students at a safe distance from in. A visit to the site, however, did not reveal any reassuring sensitivity. Students had free access to the building, even classes were held there, and were in fact the only one’s around to talk to journalists at the spot. The insensitivity with which this project was overseen and delivered is symptomatic of the indifference with which the bureaucracy and even school and college managements look out for the young. Before quality education is even mooted, this attitude should have been disciplined. What action the wall collapse incident attracts will reveal whether any attitudinal improvements have come about, although, given the immediate response of the authorities, hope remains dim. Will the students protest? Unlikely, because the authorities outdid themselves in their tactlessness last year when they “infantalised” college students by corralling them into uniforms in an overt move to stifle out individualism. Unfortunate that education should be inflicted with such comprehensive structural failure...
Poor workmanship, the bottom-rung even by the nexus-compromised construction practises, is obviously to blame for the retaining wall collapse at the government college, Gangtok. Three vehicles parked along the wall have been totalled, and even though this is a substantial material loss, the shocking substandard work would have extracted a much larger toll if the collapse had occurred during daytime. There could have been students caught under the debris. Officially, the blame will not be imposed on the quality of work and red tape will be rolled out in the form of an enquiry and investigation [if one is considered]. Even after that, the incident will be looked into in isolation- as one of a retaining wall collapse.
Such a myopic ‘investigation’, if there is one, will be inexcusably wrong because the wall collapse is only one manifestation of everything that is wrong with the entire building. The building, known to the students as the NEC Block, started off with defective planning, poor survey and incomplete investigation as the latest CAG Report has aptly laid bare. The Human Resource Development Department began in October 2004 by seeking Rs. 2.65 crore from the North East Council for “Infrastructural Upgradation of Sikkim Government College, Tadong”. Of this, the civil works component was Rs. 1.23 crore and “allied works” were pegged at Rs. 1.42 crore. When the work was put to tender, the lowest bidder, in keeping with a pattern unique to Sikkim, offered to do the work at 42.22% above the estimate, magnanimously scaling down to 38.66% above on the condition that he was also awarded work to supply furniture, lab equipment, computers and even books for the library [housed in the new facility]. The Department then revised the Rs. 2.65 crore project to Rs. 3.15 crore to fit in aspects like architectural design fee, change in roof style, change in construction site, electrification, sanitation, underground water diversion etc. How these aspects were left out from the original DPR is confounding.
Be that as it may, when the building was completed, CAG auditors found “visible seepage” from the ceiling of the library, worn out floor and stairs, three classrooms designed in such a way that posts blocked students from even being able to see the blackboard. The toilet was without water supply and just about everything required in a college block was deficient in this construction. In November 2010, the Department came on record stating that it would take corrective measures. The file is probably still being processed because even as the obvious failings of the construction have been obvious for a while, now, with the collapse of the retaining wall from its base, even the structural safety of the concrete contraption has been called into question.
The retaining wall has collapsed in a debris of dehydrated cement flakes, loose earth and wet soil. The foundation beams stand exposed, and even to an untrained eye, this cannot be safe, and although the blue tarpaulin covers might keep water away from seeping in or prying eyes from making noise, they cannot reinforce the structure. At least till expert opinion can be sought on the incident, the building has to be declared out of bounds and students kept away from it. The retaining wall might have been constructed superficially, but its job is obviously not just cosmetic- it is ‘retaining’ something up. When it collapses under its weight, what does it say about the stability of the building constructed above it? The contractor and the Department have tried their best to make the building student-unfriendly, now it is perhaps time for better sense to prevail and keep students at a safe distance from in. A visit to the site, however, did not reveal any reassuring sensitivity. Students had free access to the building, even classes were held there, and were in fact the only one’s around to talk to journalists at the spot. The insensitivity with which this project was overseen and delivered is symptomatic of the indifference with which the bureaucracy and even school and college managements look out for the young. Before quality education is even mooted, this attitude should have been disciplined. What action the wall collapse incident attracts will reveal whether any attitudinal improvements have come about, although, given the immediate response of the authorities, hope remains dim. Will the students protest? Unlikely, because the authorities outdid themselves in their tactlessness last year when they “infantalised” college students by corralling them into uniforms in an overt move to stifle out individualism. Unfortunate that education should be inflicted with such comprehensive structural failure...
There is nothing new in saying that such incidents are the expected fallout of shoddy construction work. Again, there is no novelty in saying that if corruption is rife in Sikkim, then a major chunk of the blame should go to the contractors and the collusive politicians. Nothing is more depressing than witnessing the impotency of a government which swept all the assembly seats in the last elections. The apprehension that these contractors have the money power to muscle the opposition into action may be paranoid enough but what is unforgivable is the common knowledge that these contractors are the necessary clogs in the supply chain of mollah.
ReplyDeleteThese contractors have now transformed themselves into money gobbling Frankensteins and cause the politicians (seasoned though they may be) to wince a little when they are making false promises in public about weeding out corruption from the state.
By cosmetically changing our MG Marg into a pedestrian walkway Sikkim cannot change into Singapore. Our CM may walk a thousand miles but unless driven by a strong desire to effect change, Sikkim will still remain the way it is- corrupt and carefree, and always, always subservient to the powers that be.