GUJRAT: The alleged row between Jhelum Deputy Commissioner Rao Pervez Akhtar and Cantonment Board Chief Executive Officer Ghulam Muhammad Abro over use of harsh words and warnings in official correspondence, stood resolved on Thursday at a meeting held at a ‘mutually agreed’ place in Jhelum.

The responsibility of issuing a notice under Peeda Act to the cantonment CEO with the signature of Jhelum DC, was fixed on the clerical staff at the DC office as they were transferred with immediate effect on Thursday.

The ‘controversy’ started when the Jhelum DC wrote a letter to the Cantt CEO on July 17 under the Peeda Act for not attending an official meeting after which CEO Mr Abro [also a civil servant in the federal government] in his written response reminded the deputy commissioner of his legal jurisdiction in issuing such a notice.

The letters then became viral on social media that brought about embarrassment to the civil bureaucracy, particularly the Jhelum district administration.

Reconciliation brought about at the cost of staff transfers

Jhelum Additional Deputy Commissioner General (ADCG) Omer Iftikhar Sheerazi told Dawn by telephone that a probe by the DC office found that at least nine notices to the subordinate staff of different departments had been issued under Peeda Act and the clerical staff also included the same wording in the letter to the Cantt CEO and the DC had signed all those letters as per his official routine. As a result, he said, the local administration had decided to reshuffle the DC office staff for ‘mishandling’, and causing a sort of embarrassment. He said the new staff has been posted at DC office.

The ADCG confirmed the meeting between the DC and CEO at service officers mess [‘neutral place’] in Jhelum cantonment, saying that he too accompanied the deputy commissioner besides presence of Kharian Cantt board CEO Fahim Ali with Mr. Abro.

He said the ‘misunderstanding’ was resolved and both had vowed to work together with coordination.

On the other hand, official sources said both had not yet withdrawn their respective letters written to each other in July.

Published in Dawn, August 6th, 2021

Opinion

Merging for what?

Merging for what?

The concern is that if the government is thinking of cutting costs through the merger, we might even lose the functionality levels we currently have.

Editorial

Dubai properties
Updated 16 May, 2024

Dubai properties

It is hoped that any investigation that is conducted will be fair and that no wrongdoing will be excused.
In good faith
16 May, 2024

In good faith

THE ‘P’ in PTI might as well stand for perplexing. After a constant yo-yoing around holding talks, the PTI has...
CTDs’ shortcomings
16 May, 2024

CTDs’ shortcomings

WHILE threats from terrorist groups need to be countered on the battlefield through military means, long-term ...
Reserved seats
Updated 15 May, 2024

Reserved seats

The ECP's decisions and actions clearly need to be reviewed in light of the country’s laws.
Secretive state
15 May, 2024

Secretive state

THERE is a fresh push by the state to stamp out all criticism by using the alibi of protecting national interests....
Plague of rape
15 May, 2024

Plague of rape

FLAWED narratives about women — from being weak and vulnerable to provocative and culpable — have led to...