HYDERABAD: The Telangana government has issued a memo to Special Chief Secretary of Revenue (Disaster Management) Arvind Kumar, citing ‘serious violations’ in connection with the Formula E agreement. The government has raised concerns over the payment of Rs 46 crore, along with Rs 9 crore in tax amount, from the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA) treasury before the formalization of the agreement. This payment occurred without the prior approval of the HMDA’s board of directors and the finance department, the memo said.
Arvind has been given seven working days to explain these lapses, failing which appropriate action may be initiated.
Issued by Chief Secretary A Santhi Kumari on January 6, the memo also questions Arvind’s role in entering into an agreement for organizing the Formula E event during the period when the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) declared by the Election Commission of India (ECI) was in effect. This was while Arvind held the position of Special Chief Secretary of the Municipal Administration and Urban Development (MA&UD) department.
The memo also announced the cancellation of the second Formula E race (Season 10) in Hyderabad. This cancellation resulted from the MA&UD’s decision not to fulfill the Host City Agreement signed on October 30, 2023. The Formula E Operations (FEO) said it was left with no option other than to formally give notice to the MA&UD department that it is in breach of contract.
Furthermore, Arvind has been called upon to explain the reason behind entering into a revised agreement with FEO for conducting the Season-10 event, a move made without the Competent Authority’s permission, especially while the MCC was in effect. The memo also raised concerns about designating the HMDA as the nodal agency for the event without the required approval from the designated competent authority, as per the Secretariat Business Rules.
Why was a fresh agreement allowed when MCC was in place?
Why was a revised agreement with the FEO entered afresh for conducting the Season 10 event, again without the competent authority’s permission, especially when the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) announced by the Election Commission of India (ECI) was in force in the state following the announcement of the schedule for elections to the Telangana Legislative Assembly?
Why was due permission not obtained, and why was the matter not brought to the notice of the competent authority when the tripartite agreement was terminated by the FEO? This termination allowed the promoter, who was in gross default, to go free from any liability, while the additional burden of conducting and hosting the event was shifted onto the state government