Dimapur, February 18 (MExN): The Nagaland department of Power today issued a clarification in response to two report-based news items that appeared in this daily, on the implementation of the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY) in Nagaland. A statement issued by the Chief Engineers’ office today asserted that the two news items were published “with far too many colossal errors.”
“The Power department would like to place on record that the information published with far too many ‘colossal’ errors with apparent intent to sensationalise or inadvertent callousness of not differentiating the figures between lakhs and crores,” the Power department said. For instance, it stated, the amount released of Rs. 123.74 Crores has been published as Rs 12373.55 Crores “and so on.” This is highly “ridiculous” and “yet making headlines on two consecutive days,” the CE’s office stated. The Power department also enclosed a chart-list titled “list of milestones identified for monitoring the RGGVY Project execution for 11th plan period.”
The department has, however, acknowledged that “in respect of Award Cost of Zunheboto district, the amount of Rs. 24494.54 Lakhs has been wrongly entered (in the RGGVY web portal) instead of Rs. 2494.53 Lakhs which has been communicated to REC for rectification.” The Power department has further stated that “with the objective of making the implementation of the scheme transparent, all details of the projects are made available in the RGGVY web portal.”
The Morung Express journalist clarifies to the Nagaland Power department’s response to two news reports – Nagaland gets Rs.120 Crore for Power in rural Areas’ (dated Feb 17, 2010), and ‘Rural Power index plunges’ (dated Feb 18, 2010), in The Morung Express.
Firstly – as each of the two new reports sufficiently refers to – the news reports were based exactly on three RGGVY status-reports found on the central RGGVY website and URLs to the reports.
The amount allocated was mentioned exactly and accordingly to: (1) Report - ‘A’ Status of approval of RGGVY Projects (state-wise) Status as on Jan 15, 2010 (2) Report ‘D’ – Physical and Financial Progress of RGGVY projects under implementation (district-wise) for Nagaland state status as on till October 1, 2009. (3) Report ‘D’– Physical and Financial Progress of RGGVY projects under implementation (district-wise) for Nagaland state (district-wise) status as on till February 1, 2010.
Secondly, the amount shown to have been released and as published – Rs 12373.55 Crores – has been published as per Report ‘D’– Physical and Financial Progress of RGGVY projects under implementation (district-wise) for Nagaland state status till February 1, 2010.
Thirdly, the “award cost” amount meant for Zunheboto district stated at Rs. 24494.54 Lakhs was published exactly as stated in the Report ‘D’– Physical and Financial Progress of RGGVY projects under implementation (district-wise) for Nagaland state (district-wise) status till February 1, 2010. The department has acknowledged that the amount mentioned in the report as published in the RGGVY website has been wrongly entered “instead of Rs. 2494.53 Lakhs which has been communicated to REC for rectification.”
The summarized figures represented (Lakh and Crore) were published as stated in the status-reports.
Interested members of the public may examine the following records from the Ministry of Power-RGGVY website: http://rggvy.gov.in/rggvy/rggvyportal/index.html or can obtain a copy from The Morung Express office: (1) Report - ‘A’ Status of approval of RGGVY Projects (state-wise) Status as on Jan 15, 2010 (2) Report ‘D’ – Physical and Financial Progress of RGGVY projects under implementation (district-wise) for Nagaland state status as on till October 1, 2009. (3) Report ‘D’– Physical and Financial Progress of RGGVY projects under implementation (district-wise) for Nagaland state status as on till February 1, 2010.
(In regard to the number of villages given as 142992 in the news report, they should be read as 142992 rural households (including BPL) and not villages. The inadvertent error is deeply regretted.)
