
| Font Size |
The company—Security Shoppe (India) Private limited—has written to the Chief Vigilance Commission (CVC), Chief Justice and Prime Minister’s Office.
It alleges in the letter that the Delhi Police rejected its bid to supply 136 Garrett’s 33-zone detector PD6500i, and is buying “low standard” detectors from two other companies “at a higher cost”.
The Delhi Police had placed three tenders for multi-zone door frame metal detectors (DFMDs): on September 17, 2007 for 11 detectors, on January 18, 2008 for 125 detectors and on January 28 for 18 detectors. Security Shoppe was cleared on technical grounds to supply 11 metal detectors.
Anup Gulati, managing director, Security Shoppe, said the company demonstrated another 125 metal detectors at the police headquarters on January 24, However, on February 11, the company was informed it was not “technically qualified”.
“The Delhi Police cancelled our tender and is buying ‘basic’ eight-zone door frame metal detectors (DFMDs), which are low in standard in comparison to our model PD6500i,” Gulati alleged.
“With this deal, the agency is compromising with security of ministers, Supreme Court and High Court judges apart from members of parliament,” Gulati said.
The Delhi Police, however, says the company’s tender was rejected as the technical committee did not approve of its machines. “The technical committee decides which machines are to be purchased. The decision of pricing comes afterwards. Their tender was cancelled at technical bid level,” said Rajan Bhagat, PRO of Delhi Police.
But Gulati claims Garrett’s 33-zone metal detector is among the best in the world and are used by SPG (Special Protection Group) for the Prime Minister’s security and during Olympic Games.
Gulati alleged that the order for 125 and 11 metal detectors (136 in total) was placed with two other companies for Rs 2,95,93,600. “We quoted Rs 2,58,12,800 for the 136 detectors, with seven-year AMC and three-year warranty,” Gulati said.
Gulati alleged the Delhi Police took “basic” eight-zone metal detectors from these two companies “in collusion with the companies to fill their pockets” and demanded an independent inquiry into it.


Discuss this story on expressindia forums
|
|

