Goa PWD Under Scrutiny After Alleged Forged Certificates in ₹1,000-Crore Contracts

A simmering controversy inside Goa’s Public Works Department has escalated into a full-blown debate on transparency and oversight, following allegations that a private construction firm secured government contracts worth more than ₹1,000 crore using forged or manipulated documents. The claims, raised by civil engineer Manoj S. Pai Dukle, have triggered preliminary inquiries and placed the state’s tendering ecosystem under intense scrutiny.

A Whistleblower Flags Discrepancies in High-Value Contracts

Dukle, a civil engineer from Navelim, alleges that M/s Bagkiya Constructions Pvt. Ltd. entered the highest contractor classification — Class IAA (Super) — by submitting work completion certificates that contain “serious discrepancies.” This classification qualifies companies for some of the largest infrastructure contracts issued by the government.

According to his complaint dated 15 August 2025, the firm submitted three different versions of a completion certificate for the Mudi Tank Filling Scheme, originally issued by Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited (KNNL).

Dukle points to a Joint Venture (JV) agreement dated 11 December 2019, which identifies M/s Amrutha Constructions Pvt. Ltd. as the lead partner and Bagkiya Constructions only as an associate. However, completion certificates submitted in multiple Goa tenders allegedly listed Bagkiya as the lead partner — a discrepancy he argues should have been flagged during verification by officials in the Public Works Department.

Fresh Allegations Deepen the Inquiry

On 13 November 2025, Dukle lodged another complaint, this time questioning documents submitted for the Akka Mahadevi Memorial project in Shivamogga district, Karnataka, valued at ₹51.19 crore. He alleges that the work was executed through phased tenders rather than as a single eligible project, contradicting the representation made in documents placed before Goan authorities.

A crucial element of his November complaint is Clause 18.1 of the Revised Rules of Enlistment of Contractors in PWD/WRD Goa (2020), which clearly states that work experience gained under a Joint Venture cannot be used by individual partners for separate enlistment.

Dukle contends that ignoring this rule amounts to a serious procedural lapse and raises doubts over whether undue influence or vested interests played a role in the enlistment committee’s decisions.

Slow Inquiry Raises Public Pressure

The engineer says he has submitted a detailed complaint to the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) of the Vigilance Department, but claims that the inquiry is progressing “extremely slowly.” Between 13 and 15 November, several PWD offices are said to have acknowledged his complaints, yet he reports no visible action.

Frustrated with the pace, Dukle has indicated that he may approach the Bombay High Court (Goa Bench) if the matter continues to stagnate.

A senior ACB official has confirmed that the matter remains in the preliminary inquiry stage and that no offence has been registered so far.

In response to the allegations, K. Bagkiya Durai, Managing Director of Bagkiya Constructions, has denied submitting forged or manipulated documents and said the company is prepared to cooperate fully with investigators. Officials from the Public Works Department have declined to comment on the ongoing inquiry.

Broader Concerns Over Transparency in Public Procurement

Within Goa’s engineering and contractor community, the case has sparked a wider debate on how major infrastructure contracts are vetted and awarded. Industry stakeholders say the controversy underscores the need for stronger verification mechanisms, clearer accountability, and more transparent decision-making in government contracting.

Experts warn that if the allegations are substantiated, the repercussions could extend beyond a single contractor — exposing structural weaknesses in the state’s procurement framework, from document scrutiny to oversight and enforcement.

As public pressure builds, the unfolding dispute is increasingly being viewed as a test of public trust in Goa’s tendering mechanisms and the robustness of institutional checks designed to safeguard public funds.

Shunyatax Global Editorial Note

At Shunyatax Global, we are committed to delivering precise, data-backed coverage on governance, regulation, and public infrastructure. Our reporting aims to illuminate not just individual controversies, but the underlying systems that shape public accountability.

For deeper analysis on India’s evolving procurement norms, regulatory frameworks, and global economic trends, visit https://shunyatax.in and explore our full range of policy, business, and governance coverage.

To stay ahead of critical developments shaping public finance and infrastructure governance, readers and professionals are encouraged to follow Shunyatax Global, subscribe to our updates, and engage with our expert insights.