Kelkar Committee, Background, Recommendations, Impact

The Kelkar Committee headed by Vijay Kelkar was constituted by the Union Finance Ministry in the Union Budget 2015-16 to address the growing challenges in the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model in India. Many infrastructure projects in India were facing delays, financial stress, and contractual disputes under the PPP model. To revive investor confidence and improve project implementation, the committee suggested comprehensive reforms.

Kelkar Committee Background

• The PPP model was widely adopted in India for infrastructure development in sectors like roads, ports, airports, and power during the 2000s.
• Over time, many PPP projects became stressed due to issues such as land acquisition delays, environmental clearances, and regulatory bottlenecks.
• Private sector participation declined significantly as projects became financially unviable and risky.
• There was an imbalance in risk-sharing between the government and private players, with most risks being borne by the private sector.
• Frequent policy changes and lack of contractual clarity created uncertainty for investors and developers.
• Dispute resolution mechanisms were slow and inefficient, leading to long-pending conflicts between stakeholders.
• Banks and financial institutions faced rising non-performing assets (NPAs) due to stalled PPP projects.
• The need was felt to restore investor confidence and revive infrastructure growth through reforms in PPP framework.
• In this context, the Kelkar Committee was set up to review existing PPP mechanisms and suggest measures for their revival and improvement.
• The committee focused on strengthening governance, institutional capacity, and financial sustainability of PPP projects.

Recommendations of the Kelkar Committee

The recommendations of the Kelkar Committee focuses on improving governance, transparency, financing, and dispute resolution in infrastructure projects.

• Strengthening PPP Framework: Focus on three pillars Governance, Institutions, and Capacity to make PPP projects more efficient and reliable.
• Establishment of 3PI (PPP Institute of Excellence): A dedicated institution should be created to support research, training, and capacity building for PPP projects.
• Amendment to Prevention of Corruption Law: The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 should be amended to penalize corruption while protecting honest officials who make genuine decisions.
• Avoid Swiss Challenge Method: This method should be avoided as it reduces transparency and discourages fair competition.
• Discouraging Unsolicited Proposals: Such proposals should be minimized as they create unequal opportunities among bidders.
• Innovative Financing Mechanisms: Banks and financial institutions should issue deep discount bonds (zero coupon bonds) to provide long-term, low-cost funding and reduce initial financial burden.
• Equity Divestment After Project Completion: After successful completion, project equity can be sold to long-term investors, including foreign institutional investors, to fund new infrastructure projects.
• Independent Sectoral Regulators: Set up independent regulators in sectors adopting PPP to ensure fair decisions and reduce political or bureaucratic interference.
• Unified Regulatory Approach: Regulators should follow a consistent and coordinated approach across sectors.
• Revision of Model Concession Agreement (MCA): Risk-sharing provisions should be revisited to ensure balanced allocation of risks instead of a “one-size-fits-all” model.
• Protection to Private Sector: Private players should be safeguarded against sudden policy changes or economic shocks.
• PPP Law Framework: A comprehensive PPP law should be enacted with Parliamentary approval to provide clarity, authority, and accountability.
• Infrastructure PPP Project Review Committee (IPRC): Should be established to review stressed projects and provide time-bound recommendations.
• Infrastructure PPP Adjudication Tribunal (IPAT): A specialized tribunal should be created for speedy dispute resolution.
• Efficient Dispute Resolution System: A flexible and quick mechanism is needed to resolve conflicts and allow restructuring of projects when required.
• Limit Role of Public Sector in PPP Bidding: State-owned enterprises and PSUs should not compete in PPP projects, as the model is intended to leverage private sector efficiency.
• Expansion to New Sectors: PPP model should be extended to healthcare, social sectors, and urban transport.
• Avoid PPP for Small Projects: PPP should not be used for small-scale projects due to high transaction and administrative costs. 

‹ ›

Impact on Infrastructure Development

The recommendations of the Kelkar Committee, chaired by Vijay Kelkar, aim to transform infrastructure development in India by making the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model more efficient, transparent, and sustainable.

• Revival of Stalled Projects: Mechanisms like the Infrastructure PPP Project Review Committee (IPRC) help resolve stressed projects, leading to faster completion of delayed infrastructure works.
• Improved Investor Confidence: Clear policies, better risk-sharing, and legal protection encourage private and foreign investors to participate in infrastructure projects.
• Better Risk Allocation: Balanced distribution of risks between government and private players reduces financial stress and project failures.
• Faster Project Execution: Streamlined approval processes and strong governance reduce delays caused by bureaucracy and regulatory hurdles.
• Enhanced Transparency and Accountability: Regulators minimize corruption and improve trust in the system.
• Access to Long-Term Financing: Innovative instruments like zero-coupon bonds ensure availability of low-cost funds, improving project viability.
• Reduction in Non-Performing Assets (NPAs): Timely completion and restructuring of projects help reduce bad loans in the banking sector.