Panaji, July 27: Serious questions have been raised over the manner in which high-value contracts are being awarded by village panchayats across Goa, with two citizens alleging that tenders running into lakhs and crores of rupees have been floated through physical mode despite a government mandate requiring e-tendering/e-procurement for contracts above ₹5 lakh.

In a detailed representation to multiple government authorities, Glen Fernandes and Derrick Gonsalves have alleged widespread non-compliance with the Finance Department’s e-tendering directives and sought a statewide inquiry into contracts floated by panchayats and municipalities.

The complainants have particularly flagged tenders involving the Village Panchayats of Candolim and Parra, while their representation also refers to Calangute and Arpora-Nagoa and calls for scrutiny and strict compliance across all local bodies in Goa.

The representation has been placed before authorities including the Finance Department, Directorate of Panchayats, Directorate of Accounts, Department of Information Technology, Directorate of Vigilance and Directorate of Municipal Administration, with a copy also marked to the Chief Minister.

The citizens have issued a 15-day ultimatum, stating that if the government fails to ensure strict implementation of the e-tendering/e-procurement mandate, they intend to approach the Bombay High Court at Goa seeking appropriate directions and recovery of alleged financial losses.

₹5-Lakh Threshold at Centre of Controversy

At the heart of the dispute is a Finance Department circular dated June 7, 2011, which, according to the representation, mandates e-tendering for tenders valued above ₹5 lakh.

The complainants have also cited a subsequent Finance Department circular dated October 13, 2011, an Office Memorandum issued by the Directorate of Panchayats on February 18, 2015 and a Department of Information Technology circular dated August 3, 2022.

They contend that these directions make the e-tendering/e-procurement requirement applicable to government departments, corporations and autonomous bodies, including village panchayats.

According to the representation, the requirement is not restricted to civil works and also covers procurement of goods and services from private vendors, including machinery, furniture, electronic equipment, CCTV systems, garbage collection, parking-fee collection and tree-cutting contracts.

Fernandes and Gonsalves contend that electronic tendering was introduced to improve transparency, broaden competition and reduce the possibility of favouritism or manipulation in public procurement.

Candolim at Centre of Serious Allegations

The strongest allegations in the representation concern the Village Panchayat of Candolim, which the complainants have accused of repeatedly bypassing the e-tendering system.

According to the representation, Candolim Panchayat floated four separate tenders in March 2026 for appointment of parking-fee collection contractors, with each tender allegedly exceeding ₹10 lakh.

The complainants claim that the minimum bid in one of these tenders was as high as ₹1.4 crore, yet the contracts were allegedly floated through physical tendering rather than the electronic procurement system.

Another contract concerning garbage-fee collection has also been questioned.

The representation claims that the amount involved exceeded ₹22.68 lakh per month, translating into more than ₹2.72 crore annually. The complainants allege that this tender too was processed in physical mode despite its substantial value.

These allegations have been made by the complainants in their representation and would require verification and determination by the competent government authorities.

₹2.4-Crore Revenue Loss Alleged

The representation makes an even more serious financial allegation concerning one of Candolim’s parking contracts.

According to the complainants, the tender contained a two-year experience eligibility condition which they allege restricted competition and favoured a limited pool of bidders.

They claim that at one location, the successful bid declined from around ₹2.4 crore in the previous year to ₹1.6 crore in the current year.

The complainants calculate the difference at approximately ₹80 lakh per year and contend that over the three-year tenure of the contract, this could translate into a revenue loss exceeding ₹2.4 crore.

They have attributed the alleged loss to reduced competition in the physical tendering process and demanded an investigation.

However, the alleged ₹2.4-crore loss is the complainants’ calculation and has not, on the material provided, been established by an official audit, investigation or judicial finding.

Fernandes and Gonsalves have further alleged that despite earlier notices being given to the Vigilance Department and Directorate of Panchayats, disciplinary action has not been initiated against officials they hold responsible.

Parra’s ₹8.40-Lakh Parking Tender Questioned

The Village Panchayat of Parra has also figured prominently in the representation.

The citizens have cited a tender notice dated June 12, 2026 concerning collection of pay-parking fees at the Madani Tourist Attraction Zone.

According to the complaint, the minimum bid was fixed at ₹70,000 per month. Since the contract was to run for one year, from July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027, the complainants calculate its minimum total value at ₹8.40 lakh.

They argue that considering the aggregate contract value crossed the ₹5-lakh threshold, the tender ought to have been conducted electronically instead of through physical mode.

Significantly, the representation states that after the complainants issued a notice on June 19, the Parra Panchayat decided not to proceed with the physical tender and kept the process on hold.

Why Physical Tendering Is Being Questioned

The citizens maintain that the issue extends far beyond individual tenders.

Their contention is that when contracts exceeding the prescribed threshold are processed physically despite an e-procurement mandate, the safeguards created to ensure wider participation and transparency are weakened.

They have alleged that such practices can facilitate favouritism, restrict competitive bidding and ultimately cause leakage of public revenue.

The representation consequently seeks scrutiny not merely of recent cases but of potentially non-compliant contracts issued by local bodies since the e-tendering mandate came into force.

Some Panchayats Praised for Following Rules

The complainants have also highlighted local bodies which, according to them, demonstrate that compliance with the electronic tendering system is feasible.

They have named Pilerne-Marra, Assolda, Chicolna-Bogmalo, Netorlim, Salem and Virnoda among the village panchayats that have been using the government’s e-procurement platform for tenders above ₹5 lakh.

The representation specifically appreciates the Panchayat Secretaries concerned for following the Finance Department mandate.

Similarly, Pernem Municipality has been cited for issuing an e-tender for garbage collection on July 3, 2026, while Margao Municipal Council is stated to have followed e-tendering in a notice dated July 2.

The complainants argue that this creates a striking contrast: while some local bodies are following the e-tendering regime, others allegedly continue to issue high-value contracts physically.

Demand for Statewide Audit of Panchayat Contracts

Fernandes and Gonsalves have now called for a much wider investigation.

They have asked the Finance Secretary to obtain records from all village panchayats and municipalities in Goa regarding tenders above ₹5 lakh that were floated without e-tendering/e-procurement.

They have demanded an inquiry to quantify any financial losses resulting from non-compliance and to identify officials responsible.

Where violations and losses are established, the complainants have sought action against the Panchayat Secretaries and municipal Chief Officers concerned and even recovery of losses from the salaries of officials found responsible.

The Directorate of Accounts has also been asked to examine compliance with the e-tendering requirement while auditing panchayat accounts under Section 187 of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act.

Meanwhile, the Directorate of Panchayats has been urged to initiate action against officials found violating the mandate and issue fresh reminder circulars to all Panchayats and Block Development Officers.

15-Day Deadline, High Court Action Threatened

The representation ultimately places the responsibility on the State government to demonstrate that its own procurement rules are being enforced at the grassroots level.

Fernandes and Gonsalves have demanded immediate intervention to stop alleged manipulation of tender processes and prevent further loss of public money.

They have warned that if no action is taken within 15 days to ensure strict implementation of the e-tendering/e-procurement mandate by panchayats and municipalities, they will approach the Bombay High Court at Goa seeking directions to the State authorities, including for recovery of losses.

The allegations now put the spotlight on the Finance Department, Directorate of Panchayats, Vigilance and Accounts authorities to determine whether physical tenders above the prescribed threshold were indeed issued contrary to government directives, how widespread such practices are, and whether they resulted in measurable losses to public bodies.

The representation also raises a larger governance question: if some of Goa’s smallest panchayats can comply with e-tendering requirements, why are contracts running into crores allegedly still being processed physically elsewhere?