HARIPUR, April 1: Members of the Haripur tehsil council have called for the transfer of the tehsil municipal officer (TMO) and threatened to boycott the next session if such a step was not taken.

The demand was made at a monthly session of the Haripur tehsil council which met with its convener Syed Ahsan Ali Shah in the chair here on Friday. The session was also attended by tehsil nazim Iftikhar Ahmed Khan.

The proceedings, which were delayed by almost two and a half hours, were attended by 25 members out of a total strength of 52.

Leader of the Opposition Raja Ehtesham pointed out that the session could not go ahead until the prescribed quorum was present. His claim was contested by the tehsil nazim who said that the convener himself was a member of the house and his presence should also be counted.

However, when the convener did not prorogue the session the opposition leader walked out in protest, terming the session as illegal and against the rules of business laid down in the Local Government Ordinance, 2001.

Later, the majority members of the house demanded immediate transfer of TMO Farooq Khan from Haripur. Raja Hasrat, naib nazim union council, Pind Hashim Khan, on a point of order criticised the TMO’s performance and dubbed him an incompetent officer.

They also accused him of creating hurdles in the affairs of the tehsil municipal administration and union councils. They said that if the demand of council members was not met the entire group of the tehsil nazim would boycott the next council session in protest.

Those who supported the verbal resolution against the TMO, included Muhammad Saleem Tanoli, Syed Meher Ali Shah, Abdul Samad, Durriya Khan, Haji Niaz, Gul Naseeb Khan and other members belonging to the tehsil nazim’s group.

The house was later prorogued by the convener.

Meanwhile, Raja Ehtesham, Ms Gul Ambreen Minhas, Hasrat Nawaz Khan, Awais Khan and others told newsmen that the resolution against the TMO was “unconstitutional and against the LGO 2001”. They pointed out that the convener’s presence in the house could only be counted during a no-confidence motion against either the tehsil nazim or the convener himself, but not in ordinary sessions.

They claimed that the entire business of the council was against the rules and demanded an inquiry against the convener.