Urging the Centre to act, NHAI said that if the ministry did not consider the NHAI option, it should ensure the project is handed over to the Haryana government. In any event, the Centre should not spend more time on litigation that is dragging on.

In a sharp indictment of the Haryana government, NHAI told road secretary Vijay Chhibber that while Haryana government exploits the expressway link to generate revenues, it has done little to reduce the load on the highway.

“It is the responsibility of the state government to provide connectivity across the national highway without interfering with the highway traffic,” the NHAI said. But instead of improving infrastructure, Haryana has pursued sought added NHAI investment.

Officials told TOI that Haryana government has been glacial when it has come to implementing its promises. Neither the state government or the legal process was anywhere near providing a solution.

NHAI chief in his letter said the chaos on Gurgaon expressway is due to the linear development in the millennium city where large scale land use has been changed to maximize revenue. He has said that Gurgaon’s Master Plan should have provided for lateral arterial roads instead of using NH-8 as the main artery.

The letter echoes what Delhi-Gurgaon commuters and travelers within Gurgaon experience – the highway is one of the main conduits of intra-city commuting as underpasses, over bridges and linking roads have not been developed. Plans for an alternate Delhi-Gurgaon road are also gathering dust.

NHAI said it has written that Haryana government looks towards NHAI for even construction of foot over bridges (FOBs) and maintaining drains. “This is not the concept under which the highways are supposed to be developed and maintained,” the letter says.

Singh has said that Haryana has been pushing for creating additional facilities such as flyover at Hero Honda Chowk, FOBs, crossing facilities between Rajiv Chowk and Kherki Dhaula, which are not highway facilities but conveniences for town residents.

The NHAI chairman has also pointed to “reckless” lending by IDFC and four other public sector banks, who without regard to the termination payment, gave a Rs 1,600 crore loan on account of refinancing.

Singh mentioned that NHAI and the Centre had signed an agreement on September 18, 2012, with the concessionaire only with the view to protect interests of public sector banks. He claimed that despite NHAI walking an extra mile the lenders “do not seem to be bothered at all and are still behaving in an irresponsible manner.”

Singh points out that the developer and lenders are raising extraneous issues and diverting attention from the main issue of violation of the latest MoU that was negotiated under court supervision. By not implementing its terms, the concessionaire can be in contempt of the Delhi High Court. The case, he said, has made no progress in the last six months.

NHAI said that if Haryana does not want to take over the project, the Centre can consider giving about Rs 1.8 crore revenue per month – the amount that the authority gets as its revenue share from toll.

While agreeing that the concessionaire, Delhi-Gurgaon Super Connectivity Ltd (DGSCL), hardly receive any calls on SOS booths and stated that commuters prefer calling in directly on the toll free number and the other two helpline numbers from their mobile phones.

There are 26  DGSCL booths along the expressway.

The booths have remained out of the order for most of the time since its installation on account of vandalism and not being repaired by DGSCL. The Friday visit was no difference. The booths were out of order there was no response from them

.

The RTI applicant, Aseem Takyar, had sought reply from the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) about the total number of complaints, requests for SOS service in the last one year. NHAI stated that no complaint, requests were received. The authorities, however, added that more information is being obtained from the concessionaire.

NHAI said through the SOS helpline any service/help can be obtained from the corridor control of the concessionaire. As per the concessionaire agreement, the concessionaire is also required to provide medical room, first aid material in ambulance. There are four ambulances deployed by the concessionaire.

A DGSCL spokesperson said, “In case of any breakdowns or accidents, commuters prefer to call in from their cell phones directly at the toll free numbers that are mentioned along the expressway and on the toll receipt. They can call in at the toll free number 1800-103-1700 or at 9717890175 and 0124-2450800.”

More than a 100 calls are received every day on the toll free number and another 25-30 calls are received on the other two numbers which our corridor control teams respond to speedily, added the spokesperson.

BOX

DGSCL yet to receive NHAI notice

The DGSCL is yet to receive the notice issued by the NHAI regional office issued on Monday. NHAI office issued notice to the concessionaire directing it to immediately take up the road repair work of the expressway and service lanes. A DGSCL spokesperson stated Friday that the concessionaire has not yet received the notice. However, we would be responding to it as soon as we receive it. The maintenance of service roads on the expressway is also part of the matter being heard by the Delhi High Court where the matter is sub judice and would be next heard by the court in July.

BOX

An RTI application was filed seeking information from the NHAI about the total number of complaints/ requests for the SOS service

There are 26 SOS booths along the expressway

The booths are out of the order since its installation on account of vandalism, neglect

Commuters prefer calling in directly on the toll free numbers displayed on the route. There are three numbers 1800-103-1700 or at 9717890175 and 0124-2450800.”

More than 100 calls are received every day on the toll free number

After receiving a proposal from National Highway Builders Federation (NHBF) and IRB that the proposed premium rescheduling scheme should be extended to all premium projects.NHAI has asked the ministry to put a supplementary note for Cabinet’s consideration. NHBF has said, “Selective approach in allowing rescheduling of premium will invite litigation and any policy amendments needs to be extended to all premium projects awarded, irrespective of these projects have been issued appointed date and started construction or not and allow the concessionaire who are opting for this scheme.”

It added any litigation on this issue may derail the scheme and will in turn affect the revival of this sector. NHBF has said due to economic slowdown last year and rate of GDP growth plummeting to a decade low 5% have impacted toll revenues as low as 50% than estimated in majority of projects.

According to NHAI sources, the premium committed in case of already started 16 projects comes close to Rs 55,000 crore in the next 20-30 years and developers of the yet to be started 23 projects have committed to pay Rs 1 lakh crore to the authority.

Ministry officials said it’s impossible to add fresh ones to the list of identified “stressed” projects since a consensus has already been achieved among law, finance and road ministries to allow premium rescheduling of 23 projects including GMR’s Kishangarh-Udaipur-Ahmedabad highway. “By bringing in more projects under this list we will open a new window for debate and objections. How can we say that projects where work has started are under stress?” asked a ministry official.

Moreover, the signal that economic affairs secretary Arvind Mayaram sent on Monday on premium rescheduling at a FICCI summit indicates the amount of heat this new proposal may generate. He had said that to avoid “moral hazard” because of this move, there is need to identify “stressed” projects objectively and to have a methodology.

He had added that there is need to find out whey the particular projects are stressed. “If it’s because of authority’s default then they must take the haircut. We can’t brush it under the carpet. If the developer is at fault then it must take the haircut,” Mayaram had said.

The expenditure secretary had also said that there is need of a regulator to deal with such issues objectively.