New Delhi: British firm Macalloy, which had
supplied the steel frame of the collapsed foot overbridge
outside the Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, has been asked by Delhi
Government to provide details about deficiencies in design of
the structure which the company claimed it was aware about.
A day after a committee that probed the collapse of the
bridge submitted its report, Chief Secretary Rakesh Mehta said
the firm has been told to provide its views soon so that
government can have a clear picture of the incident.
"The company has been asked to come here and present its
views," Mehta said replying to queries on the probe report
into the collapse.
Besides holding PWD responsible for supervisory failure
and the contractor for faulty construction method, the
committee blamed Macalloy for not giving information about
deficiencies in design parameters although the company knew
The design of the bridge was prepared by PWD-appointed
Tandon Consultants and Macalloy fabricated the frame based on
the design provided to it by the consultant.
Mehta said the company was told to come and present its
views immediately after the incident on September 21 but it
did not heed to the request. The probe panel also said that
the company when asked to clarify why it did not inform about
the deficiency when it knew about it in April.
Macalloy had said after the incident that they felt "the
orientation of the gusset plate are in the wrong plane."
However, no such observations were made by them when the
drawings were forwarded to them in April, 2010 by the
contractor for fabrication of the system, the probe panel said
in the report.
Promising action against anyone found guilty by the
panel, Mehta said government was still studying the report.
"We are examining the report...Action is always taken
whenever somebody is found to be involved in any deficiency,"
The collapse of the 95-metre-long under-construction
bridge, just days before the mega sporting event, had caused
major embarrassment to the organisers. Twenty-seven labourers
were injured in the incident.
The two-member panel, which submitted its report
yesterday, blamed the faulty construction methodology adopted
by private firm P and R Infraprojects Ltd and held PWD
responsible for supervisory failure.
"The report has mainly pointed out three things -- the
change in the original design, supervisory issues and time
factor (the fact that the project was being implemented in a
great hurry," Mehta said.