Annexure –1 Sampling techniques used for selection of the units ...

Report No. 10 of 2010-11repeat order, fresh enquiry was floated (20 February 2008)and PO (T8N6091) was placed (19 November 2008) @ EUadvantage of bulk quantity. Reply is not tenable as the earlier PO (No. T7N6633 &T7M6634) was placed for 4 nos. on the same vendor.381000 per pc against the additional requirement of 7 nos. IPRotor.Thus, by not opting for repeat order Company committed toincur extra expenditure of Rs 1.77 crore (EU 280000).5. T8M6612 The unit had placed a PO (8/6234) for procurement of IP The Corporate Management stated (January 2010) that repeat order was very delicate 1.40(December Inner Casing (3 Sets) on M/s Cividale @ EU 494500 per set. decision which was heavily dependent on assessment of market situation at that time. In2008) However, instead of asking the vendor for repeat orderingagainst the additional requirement of 4 sets, fresh enquiry wasfloated (22 July 2008) and PO (2008/6612) was placed (22December 2008) on the same vendor @ EU 568094 per setresulting into extra-expenditure of Rs.1.40 crore (EU 220782).many cases especially in recession times it may prove to be counter productive. Also, itwas akin to Single Tender purchase. Hence repeat ordering was not encouraged in highvalue procurements. The reply is not in the line with the provisions of Purchase Policywhich insists the placement of repeat order provided there is no downward price trend.6. F7K6566 A PO was placed (3 August 2007) on M/s. Dilling GTS, for The Corporate Management stated (January 2010) that repeat order was very delicate 0.31(November Carbon Steel Plates of thickness 110mm and 120mm @ EU decision which was heavily dependent on assessment of market situation at that time. In2007) 1225 per MT. Indent for the same material along with otheritems was again raised on 12 September 2007 (approximatelyone and half month after PO placement). Instead of asking thevendor for repeat order, the Unit went for fresh enquiry andplaced PO on M/s. Reiner Brach @ EU 1320 & EU 1335 perMT respectively in November, 2007 resulting into extraexpenditure of Rs.30.73 lakh.many cases especially in recession times it may prove to be counter productive. Also, itwas akin to Single Tender purchase. Hence repeat ordering was not encouraged in highvalue procurements. The reply is not in the line with the provisions of Purchase Policywhich insists the placement of repeat order provided there is no downward price trend.7. Total 29.09191