Move to replace working street lights irks councillors

Tribune News Service

Advertisement

Chandigarh, August 28

The Municipal Corporation’s decision to replace all LED street lights, installed about six years ago by Energy Efficiency Services Limited (EESL), a public sector undertaking, under a Rs 48 crore contract that included a seven-year maintenance agreement, has met with criticism by councillors.

They said replacing the lights, which are still in a working condition, is illogical. The MC decision would result in a significant expenditure, which is unnecessary. AAP councillor Hardeep Singh said, “The previous agency’s maintenance contract is getting over but that does not mean that all working lights should be removed. The maintenance contract can be given to some other agency. Otherwise, it will lead to a waste of public money.”

BJP councillor Saurabh Joshi said: “I think removing the LED lights that are working fine makes no sense. Either the MC or some other agency may take over the maintenance job from the EESL.”

Sharing the plan, MC Chief Engineer NP Sharma said, “The seven-year maintenance contract of the EESL is expiring next year. We slapped penalties on the firm several times for deficiency in service. Since there are no plans to extend its tenure, we have prepared an RFP (request for proposal) for putting up new street lights under the PPP model.”

“In the first phase, new lights will be put up on 50 per cent poles. The old lights will be installed at some other locations in the city,” added Sharma. Under the contract, the EESL had also replaced the traditional street lights with LED ones.

Residents have been complaining about non-functional street lights and poor complaint redress system all these years. Last November, the MC had taken note of “poor management of street lighting service”, following which the Chief Engineer had sought a report from the electricity wing of the civic body on the overall performance of EESL. MC officials said there was no improvement in the functioning of the company despite penalties.

Denying all these findings, the EESL had earlier claimed complaints registered through both EESL and MC toll-free numbers and portals were attended to within the stipulated 48-hour time, barring a few instances. The company had cited pending payments for non-redress of complaints. The firm claimed it met the 95% and above glow rate target agreed upon by both parties. A significant percentage of faulty streetlights did not fall within the purview of the EESL. Faults in cables, line or pole are to be rectified by the MC itself, it added.