Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

On December 3, 2004 the Vice President of Marshall Power & Consultancy Services informed the Director of Ports by e-mail that the officials of the company were busy on 7th and 8th of December, 2004 and, therefore, meeting dated December 11, 2004 be postponed. Similarly, the Advisor to Scott-Wilson Kirkpatrick (P) Ltd. by e-mail dated December 3, 2004 sought for an alternative date of December 10, 2004. Another company, i.e., WAPCOS, through its e-mail dated December 3, 2004, informed the Director of Ports that its officials would not be able to reach for presentation and sent necessary materials by courier. STUP Consultants P. Ltd. vide its e-mail dated December 6, 2004 informed the Director of Ports that it be allowed to make the presentation on December 9, 2004. Mac Knight Infrastructure P. Ltd., by its e-mail dated December 6, 2004, informed the Director of Ports that due to prior and conflicting commitments, its official would not be able to appear and requested for an alternative date. The Director and Chief Operating Officer, DS Constructions vide letter dated December 7, 2004 informed the Director of Ports that officials of the Company wanted to make presentation on development and construction of the Pondicherry Port. The Vice President of SPML through its e-mail dated December 7, 2004, informed the Director of Ports that they were going to develop and operate the ports and would like to work more as an operator and a developer. By the said e-mail the said company requested for an opportunity to enable it to make a presentation. On December 7, 2004 and December 8, 2004 various firms/companies made presentations before the Committee. The parties, who made their presentations, were as under:-

1. Consulting Engineering Services, New Delhi
2. Beckett Rankine, Mumbai
3. STUP Consultants, Mumbai
4. L & T Ramboll, Chennai.
41

The minutes of the meetings dated December 7, 2004, December 8, 2004 and December 17, 2004 indicate the nature of presentations, made by various parties. The presentations included modes of development, etc. The minutes of the meetings show that the Chief Secretary/ Secretary (Port), Government of Pondicherry while going through the presentations of every party had asked them whether they would be able to develop the Pondicherry Port and would able to bring in investors for the purpose of developing the Port. The minutes further reflect that certain parties, like Hauer Associates, Haskoning India Private Limitd, CRISIL Infrastructure Advisory, Consulting Engineering Services India Limited, Beckett Rankine Partnership, informed the Committee that they might be able to get a private investor only at a later stage or after seeking certain clarifications. These firms/companies were, however, not willing to develop and operate the Pondicherry Port. The minutes also reflected that only two companies, i.e., M/s. Apollo Infrastructure and M/s. D.S. Constructions stated that they would be able to develop the Pondicherry Port on their own.

03. 2.12.2004 National Institute of 06.12.2004 YES Port Management, 08.12.2004 8.12.2004 Chennai 04 2.12.2004 STUP Consultants (P) 06.12.2004 YES Ltd., Mumbai 08.12.2004 17.12.2004
05. 2.12.2004 A.F. Ferguson & Co., 06.12.2004 YES Chennai 08.12.2004 8.12.2004
06. 2.12.2004 Hauer Associates, 06.12.2004 YES Chennai 08.12.2004 7.12.2004