Rail Safety Tenders Hit by Allegations of Influence, Dilution of RDSO Norms

Admin

“Apples are being compared with Oranges”—such practices defeat the purpose of technical qualification, undermine safety objectives, and compromise the credibility of the entire procurement framework

ED/Mod and AMPU are exerting influence on individual purchasing authorities to ignore RDSO-based technical evaluations and proceed with procurement from unqualified vendors

#IndianRailways has embarked on a large-scale initiative to install Video Surveillance Systems (#VSS) in rolling stock, with the stated objective of enhancing passenger #safety and #security. Multiple tenders are currently being processed across Zonal Railways and Production Units to implement this critical security infrastructure.

Sources further reveal that several rounds of meetings were held at the Railway Board level, in which representatives of the Research Designs and Standards Organisation (#RDSO) were also present. On each such occasion, it was categorically decided that all #bidders must submit mandatory #Safety and #Security certifications, as stipulated in the governing specifications, along with their bids. It was clearly agreed by the all participants that failure to submit these certificates would render the #bidder ineligible.

However, despite these decisions, sources allege that the outcomes of these meetings were neither explicitly nor uniformly communicated to all concerned authorities. Instead, the directions were allegedly diluted, made vague, and left open to interpretation under pressure from vested interests. As a result, #tenders have been finalized—or are currently in the process of finalization—in favour of ineligible bidders at unrealistic prices. Alarmingly, the same distorted price benchmarks are being counter-offered even to fully eligible and technically compliant bidders, forcing many of them to retract from the process.

Industry experts describe the situation as one where “apples are being compared with oranges,” warning that such practices defeat the purpose of technical qualification, undermine safety objectives, and compromise the credibility of the entire procurement framework.

Industry stakeholders point out that certain bidders allegedly lack mandatory requirements such as:

  • Authorisation from Original Equipment Manufacturers (#OEMs) with in-house manufacturing facilities
  • Compliance with #MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures) norms
  • #STQC certification
  • Adherence to key technical parameters prescribed in RDSO specifications

Despite clear instructions issued by the Railway Board directing zonal railways and production units to seek technical clarifications from the Research Designs and Standards Organisation (RDSO) wherever required, it is alleged that these guidelines are not being consistently followed during bid evaluation.

Sources allege that in some cases, evaluation based on RDSO compliance is being bypassed, resulting in orders being placed on bidders who have not demonstrated #eligibility through prescribed certifications and type tests. It is further claimed that non-qualified firms are being awarded contracts, thereby setting #benchmark-prices for the entire market.

This development has had a cascading effect. Once such #rates are established, other zones reportedly insist on the same prices, even from fully qualified bidders and OEMs. As a result, technically compliant #vendors supplying higher-quality products are compelled either to match unrealistic prices or withdraw from the tendering process altogether, effectively equating qualified suppliers with non-qualified ones.

It has also been observed that even finalized tenders in #ECR, #SCR and #SECR, bidders do not fully meet eligibility conditions, primarily due to the absence of valid and proper certifications at the time of evaluation. #Stakeholders warn that this compromises the credibility of the procurement system.

The situation underscores the need for greater transparency, stricter scrutiny of technical documents, and uniform enforcement of standards, especially in projects directly linked to passenger safety and national security.

Sources have alleged that evaluation based on mandatory RDSO compliance is being bypassed in several cases, leading to contracts being awarded to bidders who have failed to demonstrate eligibility through prescribed certifications and mandatory type tests. It is further claimed that non-qualified firms are being granted orders, enabling them to set benchmark prices for the entire market, despite not meeting safety and technical standards.

According to multiple sources, the practice has triggered a cascading and distortionary effect across zonal railways. Once such unqualified bidders establish lower price levels, other zones reportedly insist on the same rates even from fully qualified bidders and OEMs. As a result, technically compliant vendors offering superior and certified products are left with little choice but to either match unrealistic prices or exit the tendering process altogether, effectively equating compliant suppliers with non-qualified ones.

Sources further allege that senior officials associated with modernization activities, including Executive Director (#ED) (Modernisation) and Additional Member, Production Units (#AMPU) of Railway Board, are exerting influence on individual purchasing authorities to ignore RDSO-based technical evaluations and proceed with procurement from unqualified vendors. It is claimed that zones conducting evaluations strictly as per RDSO compliance are being pressured to disregard their own evaluation findings and continue placing orders on such non-eligible parties.

Industry observers warn that these developments undermine the #integrity of the tendering process, compromise safety objectives, and erode confidence among compliant manufacturers. Experts stress that unless uniform and transparent enforcement of RDSO norms is ensured, procurement decisions risk being driven by price distortion rather than technical merit, safety, and long-term reliability.