Art and Craft Village project: CDA violates court orders, plans fundraiser

Court had issued a stay order to the civic agency against any operations at the village.


Azam Khan March 17, 2011

ISLAMABAD:


Defying court orders barring it from carrying out operations at the Art and Craft village, the Capital Development Authority (CDA) is preparing to hold a fundraiser at the newly established village on Thursday.


A petitioner, Jameel Abbasi, had challenged the village project’s agreement and claimed that CDA had violated rules of Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA) and the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) for failing to seek a new bid after the village was relocated from Saidpur to Shakarparian.

On Tuesday, the petitioner said CDA was planning a fundraiser in collaboration with Indus Heritage Trust (IHT) in connection with International Women’s Day, which is in violation of the court orders. He said many NGOs had been invited to the fundraiser through which the civic body aims to generate around Rs3.25 million in donations. Senior Civil Judge Muhammad Aslam Gondal of the lower court issued a stay order to CDA to cease operations at the village. The civic body had been advised to appear before court on April 4.

The Art and Craft village project was awarded to IHT, a non-governmental organisation, by former CDA chairperson Kamran Lashari in 2005. However, it was revealed that the organisation does not have a registered office or a bank account in its name, which are the minimum criteria to qualify for any bidding. Also in the agreement, prepared by the legal advisor of IHT, the national-level project has been incorrectly named as “Potohari Art and Craft Village”, sources said.

CDA Deputy Director General Law Habibur Rehman has termed the agreement “a criminal case of negligence against CDA’s high officials”. He confirmed that once the project was relocated, the agreement was nullified.

The CDA Chairperson, Imtiaz Inayat Elahi, in an earlier meeting, sought input from relevant departments to address the serious reservations and departmental flaws in the agreement. “The authority is considering review of the one-sided agreement,” he said.

Sources inside CDA said that IHT was established 11 days after the civic authority sought Expression of Interest for the Art and Craft Village project through advertisements on August 10, 2004. Moreover, audits reveal that CDA had opened a joint bank account with IHT with Rs2.5 million funds, making the private firm a shareholder of a public account. The audit also highlighted financial misappropriations worth Rs4.2 million in the joint account, during the years 2005 to 2008.

Talking to The Express Tribune, IHT Chairperson Siddiqa Malik said, “The project could not be made operational due to the civic authority’s negligence.” She added that her organisation was providing services for the project “voluntarily”.

Responding to a question regarding procedural violations of PPRA rules in the tender of the project, former CDA chairperson Kamran Lashari said, “I gave the tender to an NGO comprising women of good reputed families as per my wisdom.” When enquired about the joint account set up with the NGO, Lashari said, “It was necessary to give sole governing authority to the representatives of IHT to provide them maintenance expenses for the project.”

The former chairperson said that if the civic body officials have any objections with the deal then they can always find a better formula to run the project. “If the deal did not suit requirements of the authority then why was it closed for two years and not cancelled?” he added.

Sources said that the under-construction project would not be executed despite lapse of six deadlines. The last deadline was not met because the Planning Commission did not sanction a revised PC-1 for the project. Initially valued at Rs185 million, the project cost is now estimated at Rs320 million.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 17th, 2011.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ