Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif on Wednesday approved the registration of a criminal case against former Environment Protection Agency (EPA) director general and five other officials on charges of corruption.
The chief minister also directed the Anti Corruption Establishment (ACE) to ensure registration of the case within two days. The officials have also been accused of abuse of authority and misappropriation of funds by tampering official record.
The decision of registering a case came from the CM after a summary of the investigation report was sent to him in January 2012.
An EPA official seeking anonymity, said that former DG Dr Shagufta Shahjehan was accused of embezzling Rs3.5 million from public fund. He said besides Shahjehan, two former deputy directors Amer Farooq and Muhammad Saleem, two assistant directors Muhammad Farooq Alam and Shafqat Saeed Farooqi and superintendent Zahir Ahmed had also been charged under Sections 420, 468, 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code and Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA).
According to the inquiry report, the DG had directed her accomplices to prepare fake bills for Rs3.5 million for payment of ‘rent’ of buildings in six cities. No building was ever rented.
An EPA official confirmed that the EPA had planned to set up environment protection labs in six cities in 2009, for which they had proposed renting buildings in Murree, Rawalpindi, Gujranwala, Sialkot, Fasialabad and Rahim Yar Khan. However, he said, the process was still pending.
A complaint in this regard was filed with the EPA in August 2011, after which the chief minister ordered an inquiry by the ACE.
A team of the ACE investigating officers concluded that the DG and five other officials had withdrawn Rs3.5 million by preparing fake rental agreements and fictitious bills. A member of the investigation team told The Express Tribune that the accused officials had confessed to the embezzlement.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 26th, 2012.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ