close
Thursday March 28, 2024

AGP declares recruitment of top management in KP ITB illegal

By Arshad Aziz Malik
June 07, 2022

PESHAWAR: The Auditor General of Pakistan (AGP) has declared the recruitment of top management in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Information Technology Board (ITB) illegal and unlawful. The short-listing and selection process of officers were not transparent and merit had compromised. The auditors recommended a high-level investigation for fixing the responsibility on officers responsible at fault, termination of the employees, and subsequent recovery of the amount paid to them.

The report revealed that the management of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Information Technology Board failed to achieve its targets.The present and previous governments of PTI had appointed and regularised 19 officers including managing director, directors, deputy directors, and assistant directors on lucrative pay packages. Other than that, the auditors found serious irregularities of Rs365 million in the accounts of KP ITB during the performance audit of 2017-18 to 2020-21. The losses occurred due to illegal appointments, fictitious, doubtful, unjustified, unauthorised expenditures, overpayments, and non-seriousness of the management.

Managing Director KP ITB Sahibzada Ali Mahmood told this scribe that the observations are based on a draft report, which was prepared after a recent performance audit. Many of the paras along with justification have already been discussed and would be settled in the DAC.

“Once the official report is received, we are expecting multiple observations to be settled. Most of the observations are old and before my tenure and a major percentage of them have already been responded to in previous audits,” he said.

The MD said nevertheless, KP ITB is a rejuvenated organisation, and it has started to deliver as per its mandate by delivering multiple priority projects. The management believed in utmost transparency, merit, and openness to discussing and sharing any pertinent information regarding the observations raised with a response from our end, which would be sufficient to settle any such observation.

According to the performance audit report a copy of which is available with this scribe, it was observed that the MD Mahmood was appointed with a monthly pay of Rs1,015,000 from October 13, 2020. The selected candidate was ineligible, as he has done a PhD in Electrical Engineering from Brunel University London, the UK, and BSc in Electrical Engineering from UET Peshawar. Whereas required qualification for the said post was 16 years of education including 4 years of university education throughout the first division in IT, computer sciences, or related engineering discipline. According to HEC, a degree in Electrical Engineering is not equivalent to a degree in IT or Computer Science. As per the evaluation sheet, the selected candidate did not have the relevant experience while his name was put into the list of the applicants, fulfilling the mandatory criteria of experience for the post.

Similarly, the audit held that the MD failed to achieve the key performance indicators (KPIs) set for his first year of employment, and therefore, his contract is liable for the termination in accordance with his agreement. However, undue favour is being given by the board in the form of an extension of the contract agreement, ignoring formal performance evaluation.

The report found that the Director of Finance and Accounts Muhammad Munaim was appointed on a contract basis in January 2017 and was regularised from November 2017 at a monthly salary of Rs440,000 without any advertisement and proper procedure for initial recruitment.

The officer was awarded 20 marks out of 20 for the qualification of CA/ ACMA/ or equivalent foreign degree of 16 years regular qualification, who obtained the ACCA degree in April 2012 and the last date of submission of the Job application was December, 22,2016. In this case, the candidate lacked the required experience of 10 years overall and 05 years post CA/ ACMA, making the candidate ineligible for the said post.

Mohammad Asad was appointed on a contract basis as Director of Legal Affairs and later on, his appointment was converted into permanent. The officer was selected in hurry, setting aside all the required norms and rules just to favour the blue-eyed boy. Despite the fact that the candidate had obtained the Secondary School Certificate (SSC) with grade “C” Third Class, the recruitment committee gave him 10 marks instead of 08 which is in violation of the criteria. The Higher Secondary School Certificate (HSC) with grade “D” for which he was entitled to 08 marks as per criteria instead of 10 marks.

Similarly, Deputy Director Internal Audit Kamran Shah did not possess the required qualification certifications in Certified Internal Auditor (CIA) or Certified Information System Auditor(CISA) which is mandatory as per selection criteria for the post of Deputy Director Internal Audit. Therefore, the selected candidate is not eligible for the post, and his appointment was made in violation of recruitment rules.

Deputy Director Operation Imran Khan had awarded 30 marks for the job experience at the rate of 03 marks per year, although it was not the relevant experience as evident from his CV. Furthermore, the employee regularised from November 2017 as Deputy Director of Operation without any advertisement and proper procedure for initial recruitment.

In the case of Deputy Director Technical ShakirUllah, the interview marks were found altered in the individual’s marks sheet of committee members, making the process doubtful. Even one of the committee members had clearly written “not recommended” and gave the marks, which were later on overwritten. Assistant Director-General Administration & Record Management Matiullah Khan, having a degree of Master in Business Administration (with a Major in Finance) and MS in Project Management does not meet the eligibility criteria of qualification for the said post. Assistant Director Projects Solicitation and Planning/ Assistant Director Projects Monitoring Nazish Begum obtained an MS degree in project management from Comsats University Islamabad in the year 2018. However, she was selected for the post in March 2017 by awarding 03 marks for possessing an MS degree. She was also awarded for 05 marks for the relevant professional international recognized certificate, which she does not possess, and the candidate was given 15 marks for the five-year experience. However, scrutiny of records reveals that the candidate did not possess the relevant experience.

Assistant Director Event Management, Fahad Khan has five years’ experience as operation manager/ business development from the Food Dot Com which is irrelevant and seems doubtful because of having no issue number date. On this certificate, the candidate was given 15 marks. The topper candidate having a degree in B grade in BS 04 year and MS was ignored and the selected candidate having C grade and no MS/ M.Phil.

Assistant Director Projects Monitoring, Zia Ur Rehman has a Bachelor of Electrical (Telecommunication) Engineering Degree, however, as per selection criteria of the said post, a Degree in Project Management or Business Administration or Information and Communication Technology or any other relevant field (at least 16 years of education ) Therefore, his qualification does not fall in the mentioned-above eligibility criteria.

Assistant Director Accounts Fazal Mujeeb has CA (Part Qualified) & MA in Economics, however, as per the advertisement, the candidate has a degree in CA/ ACMA/ ACCA qualified/ partly qualified with a degree in Accounting or Finance is eligible for the said post; hence he does not fulfill the eligibility criteria for the said post.

Imran Khan as Assistant Director of Procurement obtained an MS degree in the year 2017, and before this degree; he was an MSc holder in Organic Chemistry from the University of Malakand. As per the criteria, the management was required to count his job experience from obtaining the relevant degree. However, surprisingly he was awarded 35 out marks for 07 years of experience. By doing this, the other relevant and deserving candidates were ignored by violating their own criteria of recruitment. His MS degree also seemed doubtful.

It was observed that the management had regularised the services of the six employees of contingent paid staff in the 7th Board meeting. Which was totally against the regulations? The employees were regularised without any advertisement and proper procedure for initial recruitment.