Chennithala Accuses Kerala Govt of Protecting GVK EMRI in Ambulance Contract Row

Swift Summary

• Senior Congress leader Ramesh Chennithala has accused the Kerala government of shielding GVK EMRI, a private firm managing the 108 “Kanivu” ambulance service, allegedly in exchange for over ₹250 crore in commissions.
• He released documents indicating the company was blacklisted in Karnataka and terminated in Meghalaya but allowed to participate in Kerala’s ambulance tenders despite violations.
• tender conditions prohibit participation by firms blacklisted by other states. However, the company falsely affirmed it faced no bans elsewhere, violating central financial rules.
• Complaints were filed with Kerala Medical Services Corporation regarding these violations but were allegedly ignored during technical bid evaluation.
• GVK EMRI’s contract was extended after its term ended in March 2024 without fresh bids, adding further alleged commissions worth crores according to Mr. Chennithala.
• The government called for a new tender only under pressure from trade unions; four companies participated while one got disqualified.
• Consultation firm Grant Thornton oversaw document vetting but reportedly missed eliminating GVK EMRI early on.
• Discrepancies were highlighted between previous and current costs quoted by GVK EMRI-₹517 crores for 316 ambulances approved earlier versus ₹293 crores for 335 ambulances now.

Indian Opinion Analysis

The allegations raised by ramesh Chennithala underscore serious concerns about transparency and accountability within public healthcare contracts managed by private entities like GVK EMRI. if true, permitting a firm with prior blacklisting history to handle essential services could compromise both rule enforcement and public trust.

this criticism also spotlights broader systemic issues that may exist within state procurement processes-particularly the need for stringent vetting of bidders and adherence to financial regulations across all stages of government tenders. The reported extension of contracts without competitive bidding raises questions about potential favoritism or procedural lapses within decision-making frameworks.

While political motives cannot be ruled out given Mr. Chennithala’s affiliation with an opposition party, his cited discrepancies between project costs demand closer scrutiny to ensure efficient use of taxpayers’ funds and protect critical healthcare systems from misuse or inefficiency.

For more details on this developing story: Read More