Though Bangladesh Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (BTRC) allegedly did anomalies in appointing review organisation in a dual telecommunications companies of a country, it wouldn’t stop auditing.
Even BTRC is learnt to have refused to boyant uninformed proposal in negligence of a outcome of a Central Procurement Technical Unit (CPTU).
Terming a outcome of CPTU `contradictory’, BTRC authorities pronounced which according to a PPR Act (59) a BTRC Chairman released a announcement deliberation a seductiveness of a public, which is imperative for any procurement.
Sources pronounced upon Mar 30, a BTRC in a initial proviso allocated dual franchised accountant (CA) firms to review dual mobile operators — Grameenphone as great as Banglalink — after short-listing 6 review firms whilst seventeen CA firms had taken partial in a behest process.
“CPTU outcome is not germane for BTRC as a Chief Executive of a classification gave a circulation,” says a minute from a elect to a method concerned.
One month ago, BTRC had allocated review a firms for a dual mobile operators. It proposed auditing upon Apr 5.
According to a verdict, a telecom method in a minute destined a BTRC to go for uninformed bid.
On a contrary, BTRC sent a minute to a ministry. In this letter, BTRC pronounced according to a open shopping manners (PPR) movement 57, 59 as great as 60, it is usually germane during agreement estimate of a client as great as deliverer. But a review activities already proposed in Apr prior to a emanate arose.
BTRC additionally referred to in a minute which it has modernized some-more in review activities as great as it is starting upon in correct way. According to monthly inform of a review firm, it has found many money. “In a same way, you have got some-more report in monetary irregularities.”
The BTRC`s review pierce was directed during seeking in to a monetary of all finished during home telecom use providers as great as to check if there was any irregularity, generally in pity income of a operators with government.
Sources pronounced K M Alam & Co., a single of a short-listed firms as great as second-lowest bidder, who did not get a job, challenged a behest routine as great as submitted censure to CPTU about a curiosity during bidding.
After a CPTU judgment, a firm, both in essay as great as verbally, additionally sensitive a ministry, CPTU as great as BTRC, as great as requested them to stop a review until latest organisation is allocated by uninformed behest as per a open shopping manners (PPR).
