HARIPUR, June 23: The Haripur Tehsil Council’s budget session was prorogued sine die on Thursday remarks of a union council naib nazim against the rural union councils provoked and uproar and delayed the approval of the budget for 2005-06. The council met with convener Amin Khan Badhora in the chair to discuss the Rs110.95 million budget presented by Tehsil Nazim Iftekhar Ahmad Khan on June 21.

While opening discussion on the budget, Raja Ehtesham objected to the English language document of the budget and said that it was in contravention of the provincial government’s directives pertaining to declaration of Urdu as the official language.

He criticized the proposal of Rs20 million allocation for contingencies and said that it was about Rs3.1 million more than last year’s allocation and the head of contingency paved way for corruption.

He said that under the Local Government Ordinance 2001, the tehsil municipal administration (TMA) was bound to put the bills of contingency expenditures before the council for approval but the administration had never followed the rule during the last four years.

He also criticized the tehsil nazim and the council convener for not getting last year’s revised budget approved from the council and said that the council had not approved Rs96.83 million-revised budget for the year 2004-05.

Shah Jehan Abbasi, Prof Mohammad Din, Habib Masih, Raja Haider Zaman, Chaudhry Haleem, Ishtiaq Ahmed and Fida Hussain Shah supported Mr Ehtesham.

They demanded that the new budget be referred to the budget committee for getting it translated in Urdu and then it be presented at the council but after approval of last year’s revised budget.

They also sought clarification of last year’s Rs1.5 million allocation for the tehsil component of the National Urban Development Programme and demanded that Rs1 million allocated for maintenance and repair be spent on dilapidated roads of Haripur city.

While the discussion on the budget was in progress, Sikandar Hayat, naib nazim Khalabat UC, took the floor and criticized the members belonging to the 32 rural UCs which, according to him, had no contribution to income generation by the TMA.

“We (the urban dwellers) pay taxes but they (the rural population) do not but demand equal shares of the resources”, he said and proposed that maximum funds be spent on the five urban UCs. His remarks sparked tension as the members exchanged hot words and some of them walked out of the session, thereby, breaking the quorum.

The convener adjourned the session for an indefinite period without approval of the budget.