‘Why is a physicist Sindh’s chief economist?’: PAC Sindh

[Naveed Yaseen]

The Sindh Assembly’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) asked on Tuesday why Sindh’s chief economist was not an economist and how he has been appointed at this post by violating the rules concerned.

The Planning and Development Department official concerned admitted that he was a professor of physics. To a question by PAC member MPA Ghulam Mujadid Isran as to whether a professor of physics could be appointed as a chief economist, the official pointed out that according to the rules and regulations concerned, the chief economist should be an MA in economics. He added, however, that the chief economist had a PhD in physics and he had remained a special secretary development, hence he had some background in economy.

He further said that permission had not been sought from the Sindh chief minister to amend the rules for such an appointment.

Meanwhile, while reviewing the audit of the Planning and Development Department for the year 2005-06, the PAC recommended that the Sindh chief minister and chief secretary order an inquiry into the irregular refund of a security deposit worth Rs253,008, pertaining to a scheme of the research and training wing.

PAC Chairman Sardar Jam Tamachi said that a letter should also be written to the minister for works, asking why funds were released without the completion of paperwork.

Sindh Audut Director General (DG) Nazeer Ahmed Seehar pointed out that according to financial rules, money could not be released without getting a work-completion report or certificate. He said that a certificate of this sort was issued later, which was also undated, thus showing a violation of rules.

The PAC deferred another para regarding irregular expenditures worth Rs5.139 million, which had been made without inviting an open tender.

The DG audit observed that financial irregularity had been committed, because the expenditure incurred was in excess to the tender. The PAC deferred the para, and asked the department to justify the excess amount. However, it settled the third and last para of the department regarding misclassified expenditure of Rs245,564 with instructions from the PAC chairman that a warning letter should be issued to the officers concerned.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=198748