An investigation by The Indian Express has revealed that Acharya Balkrishna, the co-founder and managing director of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd, violated tender norms in a bid for an adventure tourism project near Mussoorie’s George Everest Estate in Uttarakhand. Balkrishna, who is also a longtime associate of Baba Ramdev, held stakes in all three companies that bid for the project, including the one that was eventually awarded the contract, Rajas Aerosports and Adventures Pvt Ltd.
The Uttarakhand government had invited bids for the project in December 2022, offering 142 acres of land and various facilities in return for an annual concession fee of ₹1 crore. Balkrishna held more than 99% stakes in two of the bidders, Prakriti Organics India Pvt Ltd and Bharuwa Agri Science Pvt Ltd, and a 25.01% stake in Rajas Aerosports and Adventures Pvt Ltd at the bidding stage. However, months after Rajas was awarded the letter of award, Balkrishna’s stake in the company increased to 69.43%.
The investigation found that Balkrishna’s companies acquired significant stakes in Rajas after it was awarded the contract. Four other companies owned by Balkrishna, including Bharuwa Agro Solution, Bharuwa Solutions, Fit India Organic, and Patanjali Revolution, acquired 33.25% in Rajas. Additionally, Prakriti and Bharuwa, which bid along with Rajas, acquired 17.43% in the company in October 2023.
The tender norms require bidders to sign an undertaking declaring that they have not colluded with others or engaged in anti-competitive practices. However, the investigation found that Balkrishna’s companies had violated these norms. Tourism officials, however, claimed that the process was open to all and that shareholding overlaps were not unusual. They also stated that the contract was awarded to the highest bidder.
The investigation has raised questions about the transparency and fairness of the bidding process. The Uttarakhand government has been criticized for pushing to involve Rajas in more key projects, despite the company’s links to Balkrishna. The government’s actions have sparked concerns about favoritism and corruption in the awarding of contracts. The case highlights the need for greater transparency and accountability in government contracting processes to prevent such violations of tender norms.