MULTAN: An accountability court will hear a case of embezzlement of Rs230 million on Monday (today).

A reference No (01M/2017) was submitted with court on March 31, 2017 while stating that investigation was initiated on a complaint that WECHS secretary/treasurer Saeed Ahmed Khan conducted fraudulent balloting of residential plots of WECHS Phase-I, E Block (Extension) and allotted the plots to favourites in connivance with the then management committee (MC).

During the investigation, it was revealed that over 92-kanal land in addition to already purchased over 39 kanal were purchased in violation of the Cooperative Societies Act 1927 in connivance with the then district officer cooperative, Saleem Akhtar Qureshi, and fraudulent balloting was done without approval of layout plan from the Multan Development Authority (MDA) and the eligibility criteria was also changed.

Mepco’s HR manager Liaquat Ali Memon was convener of the balloting committee and he received the applications without scrutiny for balloting and signed the results without conducting the process. The accused caused a loss of more than Rs230 million while allotting 131 residential and 76 commercial plots.

As many as 54 residential plots were allotted to the persons whose names were not included even in the so-called balloting lists. These plots were allotted to different persons (benamis) or officials of cooperative department, the MDA and Mepco in order to oblige them to conceal illegality.

Similarly, 25 shops were given to some people as benami. Qureshi was rewarded one shop in the name of his nephew and Memon a residential plot.

Government employees requested that the refund amount paid by them to NAB against the illegal gains should not be considered voluntary return (VR). The IO stated that they could not claim to have clean hands as the plots were allotted to them in the most clandestine way as their names were not included in the balloting lists.

In case of VR the government employees could face major penalty of removal from service under the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 as going for VR meant he was admitting that he did corruption.

Sources said the IO was asked by her case officer (CO) to declare all such accused bona fide beneficiaries but she refused to do so. The case officer threatened her that he would give adverse remarks over her Annual Confidential Report and the IO succumbed to pressure. They said the ACR of three consecutive years of NAB Deputy Director Zaheer Bhatti are pending.

The IO requested the prosecution wing for opinion while stating that if there is any provision other than section 25(a) of National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999 under which NAB can recover any amount while if persons who were given plots despite their names were not included in the lists can be considered as bona fide allottees then what would be the status of those who applied for the plots by adopting entire procedure.

They said the prosecution wing which already was in liaison without any hesitation declared the accused ‘bona fide allottees’ though as per section 25 of the NAO, an accused can return the assets or gains acquired or made by him in any offence only through voluntary return or plea bargain.

In October 2016, the Supreme Court barred the NAB chairman from approving voluntary deals.

Memon’s name was excluded from the reference as accused by the prosecution wing despite the fact that the IO stated that Mr Khan could not be successful without the active connivance of Memon, therefore, he cannot be discharged from the liability of causing loss (of over Rs230 million) and putting the stake of society members at risk even after voluntary return (VR).

Mepco HR Deputy Manager Mian Sohail Afzal also returned his illegal gains through VR.

First IO of the case Shahmid Mehmood was replaced over the allegations of corruption and his CO Ilyas Qamar was also replaced for supporting and hiding the wrongdoings of his IO.

NAB’s Multan Deputy Prosecutor General Rasheed Qamar said the accused were bona fide allottees so their gains were refunded without PB or VR.

Published in Dawn, April 16th, 2018