Congress govt’s GO 17 meant to centralise corruption: RS Praveen Kumar

BRS General Secretary RS Praveen Kumar accused the Congress government of centralising residential school procurement to facilitate corruption and sideline local businesses. He also alleged political vendetta, claiming that his wife was transferred after he raised questions over government irregularities.

Hyderabad: BRS General Secretary RS Praveen Kumar accused the Congress government of centralising procurement in residential schools to facilitate large-scale corruption. He said GO No. 17 was introduced to create a single-window mechanism for corruption.

Speaking to mediapersons at Telangana Bhavan on Thursday, Praveen Kumar said that during the BRS regime, procurement of vegetables, eggs, milk, edible oils, groceries, catering and sanitation services for residential schools was handled through District Procurement Committees (DPCs), enabling participation by local entrepreneurs. However, he said the Congress government dismantled the decentralised system and invited bids only from companies with annual turnovers of Rs.300 crore to Rs.500 crore, effectively sidelining micro, small and medium enterprises.

---

He alleged that contracts were awarded to large firms such as Mafatlal Industries and Chintamani Parasnath instead of Telangana-based businesses, questioning why local companies were overlooked while neighbouring Andhra Pradesh was supporting its own industries.

Praveen Kumar stated that GO No. 17 was issued without consulting the Ministers concerned, including Ponnam Prabhakar, Adluri Laxman and Mohammed Azharuddin. He also questioned the selection of Chintamani Parasnath, claiming that its owner, Niranjan Kumar Jain, had earlier been named in a narcotics-related case and demanded an explanation from the government in this regard.

The former IPS officer also accused the Congress government of targeting his family as part of a political vendetta. He said his wife, Lakshmi Bai, was transferred from the post of Director of Agricultural Marketing to an insignificant position in the Cooperation Department because he had questioned alleged government corruption. He said her transfer was against established norms as she had less than one year of service left.

He recalled that the government had earlier reduced his security cover and that after he secured partial relief from the High Court, his wife was targeted. He described the transfer as unrelated to her expertise and intended solely to intimidate him. However, he asserted that such actions would not deter him and that he would continue to fight on behalf of the people to expose irregularities.