DG Rangers, IGFC North absence from PAC meeting noticed
A view of National Assembly. PHOTO: FILE
The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has decided to lodge a complaint with Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Asim Munir over the absence of DG Rangers and IGFC North from its meeting.
According to Express News, the committee met under the chairmanship of Noor Alam Khan.
The body refused to accept the paras of Rangers due to the absence of DG Rangers from the meeting.
The committee chairman noted that despite the paras of Rangers were of “great concern” the DG Rangers did not come to attend the session. He said the army chief should be informed over the absence of DG Rangers and IGFC North from the meeting.
Read more: TTP 'red line' for Pakistan, says FM Bilawal
The committee also expressed displeasure over the interior secretary and issued summons.
Meanwhile, the participants of the meeting discussed the tension on Pak-Afghan border, firing and the martyrdom of Pakistanis by the Afghan forces.
Committee member Mushahid Hussain Syed maintained that the US had left 95,000 latest guns in Afghanistan and questioned how the firearms reached the TTP, pointing out that they were equipped with night vision.
Another committee member Rohail Asghar censured the terrorist attacks in the country and asked was not there “one policy” to deal with the militants.
The PAC also took up the matter of charging excessive domicile fee from the residents of the federal capital. The audit officials told the meeting that a fee of Rs500 instead of Rs200 was charged to which the committee chairman asked why were not those involved in the “malpractice” identified.
The Islamabad chief commissioner admitted that charging excessive fee was a wrong decision but said that the sum was received to run the affairs of the facility centre. He said the inquiry officer had requested to regularise the amount.
The committee chairman said that they had to see what the law said and questioned why a “wrong practice” was followed. Later, he directed that action should be taken against those who were involved in the malpractice.