HYDERABAD: Non-payment of rent sparks protest: Union Council offices
By Our Correspondent
HYDERABAD, Sept 24: The members of the district council Hyderabad here on Wednesday strongly reacted to the routine absence of Executive District Officers (EDOs) and other officers of district government departments, saying that they were ignoring the local bodies’ representatives “in order to sabotage the present system.”
The session witnessed an uproar on the issue of non-payment of rent of union councils’ offices and funds for repairs. The session had to be adjourned twice by convener Nawab Rashid Ali Khan as members walked out of the house while protesting against the absence of EDOs and non-payment of rent of union councils in the district.
As the session began, Majeed Qureshi presented a resolution condemning the behaviour of the district bureaucracy and led the walkout from the house.
Lala Zahid Pathan said that UCs had not been given Rs3.7 million as announced for development works.
Yousuf Qureshi rose on a point of order to tell the chair that District Support Officer (DSO) was making correspondence with Naib Nazims of the UC which was unfair. He added that UC Nazims were being issued show-cause notices and it was time that such officers were held accountable.
He said that DSO “is supposed to give guidelines” to members.
Making similar complaint, Q.Muhammad Hakim said that DSO considered secretary of the UC as his subordinate and called for determining the status of DSO by approaching the National Reconstruction Bureau (NRB).
The chair suspended regular agenda to begin the question-answer session. The members were unanimous in their demand for rent “otherwise the landlords would expel the UC staff, including Nazims and their deputies.”
The District Officer (DO) Finance attended the house on behalf of EDO Finance. He was unable to respond to the queries posed by members concerning the financial affairs.
Except for giving a breakdown of expenditure incurred on development schemes under four phases of the Khushal Pakistan Programme (KPP), he could not provide any more details.
The members reacted to the contention of DO Finance that the outgoing Sindh minister for local bodies had banned the operation of Rs16.4 million Transition Fund which was meant for payment of rent and repair of UCs in the district.
The official said that correspondence was being made with the sitting Sindh minister for lifting the ban as an amount of Rs16.4 million was lying unused under this head.
Rauf Jafri accused DCO Hyderabad and EDO Finance of incompetence on the ground that the rent had not been paid for the last 16 months. Condemning EDO Finance, Ibrahim Chishti said that bureaucrats felt happy to make expenditures which were “favourable” to them. At this stage, Chishti led the second walkout and the session began after a five-minute break.
The questions of Dr Ayaz Arain to EDO Finance regarding transition fund had kicked off a debate. Rana Mehmood Ali Khan’s question pertained to expenditure of KPP.
Regarding Dr Arain’s question, the DO Finance furnished a statement, showing an amount of Rs29 million which were to be used for relocating staff, relocating movable assets, rental building for 12 months, repair of offices, purchase of equipment/furniture/stationery, essential training/capacity building of re-deployed staff and contingencies.
The statement said that no funds were sent back to the government. A separate statement regarding transition fund was also distributed which showed expenditure in UCs, repair/purchase of furniture for Zila Nazim office, purchase of computers/typewriters/photcopiers/23-laser printers, rent of 21-UCs, telephone stationery etc.
Shafqat Soho, Miran Muhammad Shah raised the issue of non-payment of share of UCs under the head of Octroi and Zila Tax (OZT).
