Raipur, July 16 As political tempers flared and social media lit up with images and memes of the so-called golden jug, which was allegedly purchased at a whopping Rs 32,000 per piece.
The Chhattigarh government has not only issued a clarification but also flayed the main Opposition Congress for creating false news and misleading the public. The Tribal Development Department of Chhattisgarh has come up with a rebuttal.
Assistant Commissioner clarified that the proposal for 160 jugs was submitted through the Government e-Marketplace (GeM) by the then-officer but was promptly cancelled in February 2025 due to inflated pricing.
He labelled the viral content "misleading" and stressed that no such procurement had taken place. The stir began not with a policy announcement or a budget line, but with a jug.
In Chhattisgarh’s Baloda-Bazar district, what appeared to be a routine hostel purchase morphed into a political flashpoint after claims surfaced that a water jug had been procured for an astonishing Rs 32,000.
The figure, nearly a hundred times the average market rate, sent shockwaves through the state’s political corridors, drawing sharp criticism from the opposition and sparking a wave of public scepticism.
State Congress President Deepak Baij was quick to pounce, ridiculing the alleged expenditure with biting sarcasm.
“Is this jug made of gold or capable of miracles?” he asked, condemning the BJP-led government for what he described as unchecked corruption.
Baij’s demands extended beyond Baloda-bazar, calling for a sweeping audit of purchases in hostels and ashrams across the state to expose what he claimed were endemic procurement irregularities.
Not one to back down, the BJP responded with online counterclaims, accusing Congress of deliberately stoking misinformation.
Party posts framed the episode as a strategic distraction timed to tarnish the government’s image ahead of political milestones, asserting that the public was well aware of Congress’s own questionable financial legacy.
Whether the jug ever left the portal or not, it has stirred up debate around the quality of oversight, the transparency of e-governance systems, and the larger narrative of accountability that continues to shape electoral discourse in the state.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor