KARACHI: The Sindh Finance Department has directed the Sindh Planning and Development Department to conduct a thorough inquiry into the submissions of an unusual increase of over 400% in the actual approved cost of 31 development schemes of three departments of the Sindh government.
As per the official documents (copies available with The News) the Finance Department asked the Planning and Development Department (P&D) that it has received requests from the Culture, Tourism, Antiquities and Archives, the Sindh Information and the Sports and Youth Affairs departments for authentication of revised and re-revised administrative approvals at the huge cost from Rs. 1.018 billion to 4.70 billion.
The Finance Department directed the Sindh P&D for a thorough probe to avoid the repetition of revising and re-revising the said development schemes at a cost many times higher than the original cost. Besides, the P&D was also asked to probe the matter and fix the responsibility for causing revision and re-revision of schemes.
As per the Sindh government laws, the Departmental Development Working Party (DDWP) headed by the concerned administrative Secretary of the department stands authority for the increase of Rs 200m, the said committee is comprised of representatives of the Finance and the P&D Department; above Rs 200m Provincial Development Working Party (PDWP) is authorized which is headed by Chairman P&D Department. Though there is no limit to revising and re-revising any scheme, but as per law it should be justified by the need and scope of the schemes and the item rates should be aligned with the market prices, while the P&D may question the justification being the regulator of the development.
Keeping in view the said development schemes, the original approved cost for the public library in Dari, a village with a population of a few hundred people in the Ghotki district, has been requested for an increase from the original approved cost of Rs. 50m to Rs. 199.81m; the original sanctioned cost of providing additional facilities to ‘Cultural Complex Thatta’ has been requested for an increase from Rs. 79.505m to Rs. 199.838 m; the original sanctioned cost of building a library in Bhanoth, a village with a population of a few thousand in Matiari district, has been requested for an increase from original approved cost of Rs 18m to Rs 70.045m; a request has also been submitted for original approved cost for upgradation and improvement of Marvi Rest House at Mithi from the original approved cost of Rs. 40m to Rs. 186.75m; a request has been submitted for ‘establishment of the cultural center, Islamkot, district Tharparkar’ from its approved cost of Rs. 50m to Rs. 191.632m.
A request has been submitted for revision and re-revision of the scheme of ‘installation of floodlights and allied works at Hockey Stadium of Shaheed Benazirabad (Nawabshah)’ from Rs. 36.58m to 132.186m.
A small town with a population of some thousand people Bajara of Taluka Sehwan is the luckiest on the list whose two schemes ‘establishment of cultural center’ and ‘cricket ground’ have been requested for revision and then re-revised from the original approved cost of Rs. 99.5m to Rs. 332.380m.
A request has been submitted for the revision and re-revise of a scheme of ‘construction of mini stadium’ of a small village Bhanbha of Taluka Sehwan from the original cost of Rs. 44m to 196.05m.
Most interestingly, a request has been submitted for the cost of document preservation schemes in the name of ‘establishment of district archives’ of Larkana and Sukkur districts of Rs 44m, which has been increased to Rs 381.63m, nearly 800% above the original approved cost.
Requests have been submitted for the increase and re-increase of the originally approved costs of many schemes for 300%, 400%, 500%, and in some cases up to 800%.
The departments whose requests for the revision and re-revise are under question have declared the additions to the schemes under the law in their replies to the Sindh P&D and termed the requests as per the approval of the competent forums. The said departments also submitted documents for the revision of schemes.
Court asked appellants to satisfy it on next hearing that how decision of single bench was not right
Petitioner’s lawyer informed court that parliament had passed 26th Constitutional Amendment
CM urged people to choose between resisting oppression and embracing freedom or continuing under shackles of slavery
Committee emphasised need for effective legislation to safeguard rights of parliamentarians
Muzammil Aslam highlighted need for 5,000 watersheds in KP, requiring an investment of Rs 115 billion
Justice Shahzad observed that with support of appellant, 85% power theft was witnessed in his locality
