ED books IMS’s former director Dr Devika Rani under PMLA
By Newsmeter Network Published on 27 Dec 2019 3:27 PM GMT
Hyderabad: Enforcement Directorate has booked a case against Dr Ch Devika Rani — Former Director of Insurance Medical Services (IMS) — under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The ED sleuths are probing into the alleged money laundering and shell companies. The case comes after the Anti-Corruption Bureau submitted the FIR registered against the former IMS Director for disproportionate assets.
ACB had arrested Dr Ch Devika Rani and 16 other government officials, including two other doctors holding critical positions in IMS, under the Prevention of Corruption Act. ACB’s investigation revealed that Devika Rani and other officials were involved in making fake indents, falsification of records, and violating rules in purchase of medicines, surgical kits. Allegedly, this has caused the government exchequer a loss of Rs 9 crore.
Long before ACB probed the case, a complaint was filed with the Vigilance and Enforcement Department against the corrupt officials. In their probe, V&E found a multi-crore fraud in the medicine’s supply to dispensaries and ESI Hospitals by non-rate contract firms, involving top government officials. After studying the supply of drugs by firms between 2016 and 2018, V&E concluded that large-scale violations were done in the purchase of medicines and surgical kits. The investigating agency then recommended to the Telangana Principal Secretary of Labour, Employment Training and Factories to initiate disciplinary action against errant officials.
The V&E findings are:
1. The IMS Director formed no drug procurement committee for analysing the requirement of drugs and medicines at the beginning of the year.
2. Medication not supplied by rate contract firms, and medicines not included in the list were locally purchased without forming any local purchase committee, which is mandatory.
3. The IMS Director did not create tender scrutiny committee to identity bidders through the pre-bid process.
4. The officials failed to identify eligible firms; as a result, the quotation was accepted from a few firms, which belong to one family, with minor variation in prices. It defeated the very purpose of the tender.
