Professional Documents
Culture Documents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
9. IN-HOUSE IMPROVEMENTS
vii) Training was imparted to the dealing staff for proper record
and data management, entailing efficient record keeping.
18. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I. GENERAL
1. Anti-Corruption Establishment
2. Board of Revenue
3. Communication & Works
4. Cooperatives/Housing & Urban Development
5. District Coordination Officers
6. Excise and Taxation
7. Education
8. Finance
9. Food
10. Health
11. Housing, Urban Development & Public Health
Engineering
12. Irrigation and Power
13. Labour and Human Resource
14. Lahore Development Authority
15. Livestock and Dairy Development
16. Local Government & Rural Development
17. Police
18. WASA Lahore
19. Zakat and Ushr
GENERAL
1. ACCESS TO INFORMATION
Each office should print brochures giving details about its activities, procedures
and set up through which a person can deal in connection with his relevant matter.
Such brochures should be provided free of cost to the persons asking for it at the
information/guidance counters.
It is recommended that:-
d) No Marriage Certificate:
Widows whose husbands die during service are granted financial aid
out of Benevolent Fund for life whereas widows whose husbands die
after retirement are granted financial aid for the unexpired period of
15 years from the date of retirement of the deceased officials. Equity
demands that this disparity be removed and widows of those
government servants who die after retirement may also be allowed
the grant for life.
DEPARTMENTS
2. BOARD OF REVENUE
A) Revenue Department:
e) Now that Revenue Officers upto the level of Collector have been
relieved of other multifarious duties, the system of regular and
surprise inspections of record, offices and performance of Patwari,
Kanoongo, Naib Tehsildar, Tehsildar be restored ensuring up to date
maintenance of record by the concerned officials.
iii) Even when it was proved that the survey report or the notice for tax
contained wrong information regarding nature of occupation, no
action was taken against the concerned official who created
problems for the citizens and perhaps also forced them to pay
bribe for making correction in the record.
iv) Notices issued to property owners are rarely legible and are issued
without filling all the columns or giving postal address, telephone
number of the officer sending it. Deciphering these and
understanding their import is not possible for ordinary citizens.
e) The rate of tax at present is 20%, if the ARV is upto Rs.20,000/- and
25% if the rental value is in excess of Rs.20,000/- which is rather
high and may be encouraging under assessment of rental value. A
fresh look on the rate of tax is indicated. The Cantonment Boards
charge 15% of ARV as tax.
7. EDUCATION
iii) Under four tier formula, posts were identified in different colleges
and schools. Against these posts, teachers were promoted. Because
of extraneous factors, promoted teachers were not adjusted on merit
against available vacancies, rather junior teachers were allowed to
continue against posts in higher scales or at the stations of their
choice. Students in rural and mufasil areas remained deprived of
quality education.
The senior officers need to take notice of this state of affairs and to
rectify to enable the teachers to devote their time and energy to their basic
responsibility of imparting education rather than running after the officials
to get what is their due.
ii) Roll no. slips are issued with considerable delay. In some
complaints it was alleged that the examination centers quoted
on the roll no. slips were found wrong.
8. FINANCE
9. FOOD
It is suggested that:-
10. HEALTH
iii) In rural and mufassil areas, health services are still more
unsatisfactory. Health centres are dysfunctional for want of staff,
medicines and equipment. In many cases buildings of health centers
had been left incomplete resulting in wastage of public wealth.
The Department should take steps to tackle the problem which has
already assumed serious proportion.
12. IRRIGATION & POWER
ii) With the passage of time, changes take place in ownership etc. and
‘Wara Bandi’ needs to be updated but it is not done because of the
cumbersome procedure under the Canal and Drainage Act.
Resultantly, quite a large number of disputes on water rights/use
arise and sometimes lead to serious situations.
With effect from June, 2004, LDA has modified its exemption
policy to the effect that permissible exemption stand virtually withdrawn. It has
been made applicable retrospectively. There are still scores of exempted allottees
from whom even the development charges have been recovered but they have not
been given possession of their plots on one pretext or the other. They have
suffered because of no fault of theirs. The Authority should have retained plots for
allotment to those whose land was acquired giving them the option of getting an
exempted plot. Due to the wrong already committed, another wrong is being
committed by offering them compensation at the rates when the land was acquired
a quarter century back or more.
17. POLICE
i) Not taking action u/s 88 Cr. P.C. and being content with getting the
accused declared as P.O.
j) After investigation, where the charges are not proved reports u/s
173 CrPC are not submitted for months before the court.
ii) Strict action should be taken against police officials found involved
in raids on houses without search warrants issued by a court of law
or in clear violation of the provisions regarding hot pursuit.
vi) The investigating staff must be equipped with and trained in the
latest investigation equipment and techniques. More often than not
the cases are still concluded on oath by the parties. This
arrangement does not secure conviction of those who actually
committed an offence.
vii) In most complaints it has been noticed that non arrest of an accused
in a cognizable case is explained by stating that proclamation under
section 87 Cr.P.C. has been issued. This must be followed by action
under section 88 Cr.P.C. to attach the property of the absconding
person.
iv) It should also clearly define the term “non domestic use of water”
because in some cases even when a small shoe manufacturing unit is
installed which does not use any water, the Agency charges non
domestic or commercial tariff.
v) All columns on the bill must be filled and efforts should be made to
issue the bills in Urdu so that the consumers can easily understand.
The agency also must streamline the bill delivery system so that the
bills are distributed regularly among the consumers.
ii) Make those persons ineligible for being elected to the Local Zakat
Committees whose close relatives (sons, daughters, sisters, brothers,
brothers-in-law, fathers-in-law, mothers-in-law) are ‘Mustahqeen’.
This is being suggested because the Central Zakat Council has
reportedly clarified that there is no embargo on number of Local
Zakat Committees to pay zakat to their ‘Mustahqeen’ relatives.
RECEIPT & DISPOSAL OF COMPLAINTS
Total
17801 21550 17714 12910 13850 14237 13192 12117
Processed
Disposal 7752 15532 13713 7445 8199 10437 9509 7384
Pending: 4733
DEPARTMENT / AGENCY WISE BREAKUP
OF COMPLAINTS 2004
Sr. No. DEPARTMENT / AGENCY COMPLAINTS %age
1 Police 1307 17.31%
2 Education 1193 15.80%
3 District Governments 634 8.40%
4 Local Govt. & Rural Development 588 7.79%
5 Health 488 6.46%
6 Irrigation & Power 459 6.08%
7 Board of Revenue 357 4.73%
8 Water & Sanitation Agencies 206 2.73%
9 Benevolent Fund Boards 204 2.70%
10 Zakat & Ushr 203 2.69%
11 Excise & Taxation 183 2.42%
12 Accountant General Punjab 166 2.20%
13 B.I.S.Es 147 1.95%
14 Universities 145 1.92%
15 Agriculture 140 1.85%
16 Communication & Works 110 1.46%
17 Forestry, Wildlife & Fisheries 108 1.43%
18 Development Authorities 83 1.10%
19 Cooperatives 82 1.09%
20 Bait-ul-Maal 79 1.05%
Housing, Urban Development & Public Health
21 Engineering 68 0.90%
22 Home/Jails 63 0.83%
23 Anti Corruption Establishment 55 0.73%
24 Industries 49 0.65%
25 Auqaf 47 0.62%
26 Livestock & Dairy Development 41 0.54%
27 Food 40 0.53%
28 Social Welfare & Women Development 37 0.49%
29 Transport 34 0.45%
30 Labour & Human Resource 32 0.42%
31 Population Welfare 32 0.42%
32 TEVTA 31 0.41%
33 Finance 30 0.40%
34 Board of Technical Education 23 0.30%
35 Services & General Administration 19 0.25%
36 Punjab Public Service Commission 16 0.21%
37 Mines & Minerals 11 0.15%
38 Bank of Punjab 11 0.15%
39 Environment Protection 9 0.12%
40 Information & Culture 8 0.11%
41 Planning & Development 5 0.07%
42 Punjab Small Industries Corporation 4 0.05%
43 Law & Parliamentary Affairs 3 0.04%
44 Punjab Text Book Board 1 0.01%
45 Sports 1 0.01%
Total 7552 100%
Federal / Private / Where departments were not
mentioned 882
Grand Total 8434
DISTRICT-WISE BREAKUP OF COMPLAINTS
2004
Pending 4,733
NON-MAINTAINABLE COMPLAINTS
2004
CATEGORY COMPLAINTSPERCENTAGE
Subjudice 153 7%
Anonymous 131 6%
Press clippings 71 3%
Time barred 13 1%
Total: 2285 100%
NATURE OF MALADMINISTRATION REFLECTED IN
MAINTAINABLE COMPLAINTS 2004
FEBRUARY 602 -
MARCH 799 -
APRIL 805 -
5 D.C.O., Lahore 3 3
D.C.O.,
6 1 1
Faisalabad
D.C.O., Mandi
7 1 1
Bahauddin
8 WASA, Lahore 2 1 1
WASA,
9 1 1
Gujranwala
WASA,
10 3 1 2
Faisalabad
Accountant
11 2 2
General Punjab
Communicatio
12 2 1 1
n and Works
Board of
13 5 3 2
Revenue
15 TEVTA 1 1
16 LG & RD 10 8 1 1
BISE,
17 1 1
Rawalpindi
BISE,
18 1 1
Gujranwala
19 Education 7 4 2 1
Punjab
20 2 1 1
University
Agriculture
21 University 1 1
Faisalabad
University of
Health
22 2 2
Sciences,
Lahore
Bahauddin
Zakariya
23 1 1
University,
Multan
24 Police 2 2
25 I&P 1 1
27 Agriculture 1 1
28 Health 1 1
Punjab Small
Industries
29 1 1
Corporation,
Sargodha
30 PAD&SC 2 1 1
31 S&GAD 1 1
Punjab
Employees
32 1 1
Social Security
Institution
Total 68 49 11 8
IMPLEMENTATION PETITIONS
2004
JANUARY 36 27
FEBRUARY 52 -
MARCH 49 -
APRIL 30 -
MAY 29 13
JUNE 31 37
JULY 28 38
AUGUST 14 47
SEPTEMBER 3 51
OCTOBER 6 46
NOVEMBER 7 54
DECEMBER 8 58
Ghulam Hussain S/o Anayat Khan, Electrician, Market Committee, R/o H. No.
112 Street No. 76, Islampura, Main Bazar Shahdara, Lahore, in his complaint dated
9.10.2000 alleged that the Chairman, Market Committee, Lahore, had removed him from
service unlawfully. On his appeal, the impugned Order dated 4.5.1998 was set aside by
the Director Agriculture (E&M)/Appellate Authority, vide his order dated 5.9.1998 but
the Chairman Market Committee refused to implement the said orders. The complainant
sought redressal of his grievance from this office. Ombudsman Punjab vide his order
dated 28.12.2002 directed the agency to implement the orders of Director Agriculture
(E&M) Punjab.
The Agency did not implement the said order. The complainant then filed an
implementation petition on which the report of the agency was obtained. It transpired that
agency had filed a representation before the Governor Punjab, against the order of the
Ombudsman dated: 28.12.02. Vide his order dated 2.12.2003, Governor rejected the
representation of the Agency and upheld the order of the Ombudsman. Consequently the
Chairman Market Committee reinstated the petitioner in service and paid him the arrears
also. The illegal action taken by the agency against the petitioner was, thus, got rectified
through the intervention of this Office.
Allah Wasaya S/o Wahid Buksh R/o Ward No.5, Mohallah Eid-Gah, Tehsil &.
District Layyah, filed a complaint on 22.10.2003 that he served as a Mechanic in the
Department of Agricultural Engineering, Layyah, for 30 years and retired a few years
back. During service he had been subscribing towards his G. P. Fund regularly vide
No.II.Agri(11827). His G. P. Fund accumulation from 5/72 to 5/77 had not been paid to
him as the relevant entries were stated to be missing in the record. Being an old and sick
person he required financial support, but the department was delaying the payment of his
G. P. Fund arrears on different pretexts.
The matter was taken up and pursued with the agency concerned i.e., Director
General Agricultural Engineering Lahore who got the relevant record thoroughly
checked, traced out the missing entries worth Rs.4,176/- and paid the same to the
complainant vide pay order No. SP/B-565708, dated 9.1.2004. The complainant
acknowledged the receipt of this amount.
The matter was taken up with DCO/Chairman District Benevolent Fund Board
Pakpattan on 19.2.2004 to proceed in the matter in accordance with the law to redress the
grievance of the complainant.
DCO Bahawalnagar reported vide his letter dated 16.6.2004, that the complainant
had been paid the grant @ Rs.1700/- per month for the period from 1.7.2003 to
31.12.2003 and transferred the amount to complainant’s bank account No.6618 Allied
Bank Limited, Arifwala. The grievance of the complainant was accordingly got
redressed.
BOARD OF REVENUE
SANCTIONS OF MUTATION
Complaint No: 8047/02 D-IV-1078/02
Matter was taken up with the agency DDO(Revenue) Kot Addu. He reported that
mutation Nos.23 and 24 had been entered regarding the complainant’s Ahatas No.47 and
48 and the same had been sanctioned on 21.4.2003 by the order of Tehsildar. Grievance
of the complainant was, thus, redressed and the complaint stood disposed of having borne
fruit.
On the notice issued by this office Naib Tehsildar, Jampur reported that
complainant’s father namely Allah Bukhsh was owner of land measuring 08 kanals 11
marlas in Khatas No.1094 and 1096 and the land mentioned in the complaint was
adjoining the lands of the complainant. The other party had not sold his total holding and
only one kanal eight marlas had been sold through different mutations. He submitted that
the complainant may be advised to move for demarcation of land so that his grievance
could be redressed.
While the proceedings were in hand, the complainant submitted in writing that
Revenue Department had demarcated his lands and the area in unauthorized possession of
the other party had been handed over to him. Grievance of the complainant, thus, stood
redressed on the intervention of this Office.
A report was called from the Agency. Deputy District Officer (Revenue)
Ferozewala District Sheikhupura reported on 27.8.2004 that the requisite mutation had
been sanctioned in favour of Ahmad Mubarak. Thus on the intervention of this office,
the grievance of the complainant was redressed. D.C.O Sheikhupura was however,
directed to initiate action against those who caused delay in giving effect to the judgment
and decree of civil court. In compliance, EDO (Revenue) reported that departmental
proceedings had been initiated against Iqrar Hussain Patwari under the rules.
CORRECTION OF MUTATIONS
Complaint No:8510/2003-Adv-II-521/2003
Mst Hanifan Bibi and Maryam Bibi filed a complaint stating that their father
Noora owned agricultural land measuring 18 acres in Chak No. 58/6, Tehsil Nankana
Sahib District Sheikhupura. The brothers murdered their father and then, in connivance
with revenue officials, got the land mutated in their favour showing that they had no
sisters. Their brothers have also been issuing them threats of murder. They requested
that mutation No. 412 dated 30.12.1997 and mutation No. 413 dated 30.12.1997 of Chak
No.58/6 Tehsil Nankana should be cancelled and their share of inheritance given to them.
The Agency has accepted the contents of the complaint. It has been admitted that
the complainants are daughters of deceased Noora and sisters of deceased Ahmad Ali.
The Revenue Officer of Halqa also pointed out that mutation No. 413 which is related
‘Khangi Taqseem’ has also not been decided in accordance with the entries available in
the revenue record and without deciding the inheritance of Noora. It has, thus, been
conceded that both the mutations No. 412 and 413 need to be reviewed. The Agency
however, proposed that the complainants should file an appeal before the District Officer
(Revenue) for redressing their grievance. This proposal was not considered fair, when
the revenue authorities had come to the conclusion that the two mutations were patently
wrong, they should correct the record suo moto. District Officer (Revenue) Sheikhupura
was therefore, directed to review the mutations and get them sanctioned in favour of
rightful heirs. It has been reported that the mutations have been reviewed and
complainants given their share of inheritance. Thus, with the intervention of this Office
the grievance of the complainants stands redressed.
Mst. Sakina Mai on 10.4.2003 lodged a complaint that her mother Mst. Aziman
daughter of Khan Muhammad gifted her land measuring 6-kanals in Mauza Basti Arif
Tehsil Jatoi District Muzaffargarh vide mutation No.5780. The possession of the land
was also delivered to her and she was in possession of the said land since 18.8.1998.
Patwari halqa also issued her `Fard Malkiat’ of the above said land on 29.7.1999.
Later it was revealed to her that mutation No.5780 had been cancelled by the
Consolidation Officer/Assistant Collector grade-II. The land had been sold by Mst.
Aziman to one Muhammad Rafique vide mutation No.6913 dated 20.3.2003 with the
connivance of the respondent Revenue Officer and other officials of the Revenue
Department with corrupt motive. It was prayed that mutation No.5780 be restored and
she be entered as owner of the said land in the revenue record. The Revenue Officer and
other respondent officials be proceeded against under the law.
Muhammad Abid S/o Ali Muhammad, a landowner of Mauza Arra Tehsil Choa
Saidan Shah District Chakwal on 17.3.2004, lodged a complaint, stating that on
26.8.2003 he applied to Tehsildar Choa Saidan Shah for preparing a ‘Fard Badar’ in
respect of khasras No.1507, 1508, 1532, 1581/1 and 1638. The application was marked to
the Patwari by the Tehsildar for further necessary action. The complainant alleged that
the Patwari delayed the matter on one pretext or the other and finally demanded
Rs.10,000/- from him for the purpose. The complainant sought intervention of this Office
in the matter.
Matter was taken up with the Tehsildar Choa Saidan Shah District Chakwal on
25.3.2004. The representative of the Agency appeared in this Office on 20.4.2004 and
stated that reference of one khewat could not be made inadvertently in the inheritance
mutation No.2752 dated 19.2.2000 of Ali Muhammad son of Fateh Muhammad
deceased, the complainant’s father, wherein he was also a shareholder. Necessary
correction had been made in the revenue record through ‘Fard Badar’ No.32 and
attested/sanctioned by the Revenue Officer halqa on 21.11.2003. A copy of the ‘Fard
Badar’ was submitted which was delivered to the complainant.
Mst. Tayyaba Sadaf D/o Ch. Tahir Mahmood, R/o 72, Shama Colony, Begumkot,
Shahdara, Lahore complained on 19.8.2003, that she had qualified the Diploma of
Vocational Training from the Board of Technical Education, Lahore, during the session
1997. Inadvertently her date of birth was recorded as 6.1.1977 whereas, her correct date
of birth was 6.1.1975. The Agency did not make necessary correction in the certificate
despite her repeated requests.
The grievance of the complainant was, thus, got redressed on the intervention of
this Office.
COMMUNICATION & WORKS DEPARTMENT
Wakeela Begum, widow, filed a complaint, stating that her husband ex XEN
Provincial Buildings Division, Bahawalpur died on 2.7.2004 during service and that she
applied for monthly and funeral grants from Benevolent Fund. She added that
Administrative Officer (B.F), Lahore issued cheque for Rs.2000/- as funeral grant, but it
was not cashed by the bank concerned, as having been presented after six months of the
date of issue of the cheque.
The Agency was asked to redress the complainant’s grievance in accordance with
the law, which reported that monthly grant had been sanctioned for the period from
3.7.2001 to 31.12.2001 and Rs.6000/- for the period from 1.1.2002 for life, in accordance
with the rules. The Agency further intimated that funeral grant of Rs.2000/- had also
been paid to the complainant through cheque dated 15.6.2004. The grievance
accordingly was got redressed.
COOPERATIVES DEPARTMENT
Major (Retd) Shehzad Hussain Khan R/o 3-Professors Street, Peer Khursheed
Colony, Opposite AI-Hamra Bakery, Multan, in his complaint dated 29.8.2003 alleged
that the Revenue Employees Cooperative Housing Society (Regd) Rawalpindi, being
managed by the Cooperative Department had enlisted him as member at No.630 on
25.3.1990. As a member he was allotted Plot No.6 measuring 2 kanals in street No.34
South vide letter dated 26.4.1993. The price of the plot amounting to Rs.5,20,000/- was
deposited by him on 29.3.1999, in the account of the Cooperative Society. In the year
2000, he was informed by the said Cooperative Housing Society that as a matter of policy
two kanal plots had been reduced to one kanal only. However, no refund was allowed in
his favour on account of reduction of size of the plot inspite of his repeated requests to
the concerned authorities. The complainant requested that the excess amount received by
the Society be refunded.
The matter was taken up with the Agency concerned i.e., Secretary Revenue
Employees Cooperative Housing Society, Rawalpindi which agreed to refund the excess
amount and handed over a crossed cheque No. 862831 dated 29.12.2003 for
Rs.2,40,000/- to the complainant in this Office on 24.1.2004. The Agency further assured
that the complainant would be considered for allotment of one kanal plot against the
remaining funds as soon as the area, under litigation became available. The problem of
the complainant was thus solved through the intervention of this Office.
Zafar Iqbal filed a complaint stating therein that he had deposited all his savings
with Services Cooperative Credit Corporation but only an amount of Rs.25000/- had been
paid to him and Rs.70,000/- were still outstanding against Punjab Cooperative Board for
Liquidation. The Board had failed to arrange payment of his dues despite the fact that the
relevant papers were delivered to the Board officials. He has requested that his balance
amounting to Rs.74000/- be paid to him.
Secretary Punjab Cooperative Board for Liquidation filed a reply informing that
the cheque of the complainant has been prepared and subsequently it was intimated that
the cheque amounting to Rs.28,768/- was paid to the complainant. The complainant
confirmed it in his rejoinder.
The grievance of the complainant was thus redressed to the extent of 50% of the
total amount deposited with the defunct Corporation as per Govt. policy with the
intervention of this Office.
Mr. Qurban Ali Butt in his complaint dated 29.5.2004, stated that he deposited an
amount of Rs.1,11,000/- in 1990 in the Kisan Cooperative Commercial Corporation,
Rasool Nagar Branch, District Gujranwala, which had not been paid to him. On
approaching the PCBL, he was informed that intimation would be sent to him about the
date on which he would .receive cheque for the amount decided in the payment policy.
He contacted the PCBL many times but could not succeed in getting the cheque for the
requisite amount. He being a poor/ex-military man had to arrange marriage of his three
daughters and for want of money, he was facing great difficulties. The complainant
requested for issuance of instructions to the Agency so that he could get the requisite
amount from the PCBL.
On the intervention of this Office, the Agency reported on 12.10.2004 that the
complainant had received cheque No.5613862 for Rs.46,341/- on 11.10.2004.
As the grievance of the complainant stood redressed, his complaint was disposed
of having borne fruit.
DISTRICT GOVERNMENT
DEVELOPMENT WORK
Complaint No: 910/04 D-IV-77/04
DELIVERY OF COPIES
Complaint No:8470/2003-Adv-II-518/2003
Haji Shahid Mehmood filed a complaint dated 14.10.2003 accusing staff of Sub
Registrar City, Lahore of refusing to provide him copies of registered sale deeds on the
pretext that particulars of documents were incorrect. Sub Registrar Data Gunj Bakhsh
Town Lahore reported on 2.12.2003 that particulars of two documents were correct and
certified copies had been delivered to the complainant but the other two documents
remained untraced because of incorrect particulars. During investigation, it was found
that Sub Registrar office took very long time to provide copies even in those cases where
particulars were correct. The Sub Registrar was therefore directed to fix responsibility
for causing delay in providing copies of registered deed whose particulars were correct
and take action against the delinquents to ensure that the work of the Sub Registrar is
streamlined for the benefit of general public. The following directions were also issued.
iii. a sufficiently senior and well-reputed official be designated to guide the applicants
for resubmitting the application after removing the objections.
Sub Registrar, Data Gunj Bakhsh Town, Lahore submitted compliance report on
9.10.2004 intimating that all the recommendations have been implemented in his office.
PAYMENT OF ARREARS
Complaint No: 6790/03 D-IV-398/03
Complainant Fazal Karim stated that he retired on 27.7.1993 on attaining age of
superannuation from the Fire Brigade Department of ex-MCL. He stated that
Government of Punjab, LG&RD Department decided to adopt the Revision of Pay Scales
and Fringe Benefits issued by the Government of Punjab vide letter No.FD-PC-2-2/94
dated 18th July, 1994 for the employees of local councils w.e.f 1.6.1994. He alleged that
the agency had not paid his arrears on the basis of revised pay scales. He moved many
applications to the concerned authorities, but no action was taken. He had prayed that
order be passed for payment of his arrears.
Fire Officer, City District Government Lahore reported that arrears after revision
of the pension had been paid to the complainant vide cheque No.1173767 dated
30.8.2004 amounting to Rs.28,078/. Complainant had also submitted an application and
stated therein that he had received his arrears amounting to Rs.28,078/-. Grievance stood
redressed by the intervention of this Office.
PAYMENT OF TA BILLS
Complaint No:5919/2003-Adv-II-216/2003
Complainant Zia-ul-Haq, a retired Senior District Cooperative Officer, Faisalabad
submitted a complaint on 21.7.2003 that he was aggrieved on account of
maladministration committed by Mr. Abdul Basit Sohail, ex-Executive District Officer
(Community Development) Faisalabad, he on his posting at Faisalabad, illegally took
away the official vehicle of the complainant to his residence, after breaking open the
garage and car lock. This incident was brought to the notice of the Secretary
Cooperatives, Government of the Punjab, Lahore. On his directions FIR was lodged with
the local police. Mr. Abdul Basit Suhail retaliated and kept T.A. bills of the complainant
pending until the bills were time barred. A complaint was filed.
The matter was taken up with the Agency on 22.7.2003. The Agency on initiation
of proceedings by this Office reported on 5.11.2003, that the impugned TA bills of the
complainant was sanctioned/paid. The complaint was thus disposed of as fructified.
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
PAYMENT OF SCHOLARSHIP
Complaint No: 817/03/C.VI-62/03/ADV-I
Mr. Liaqat Ali s/o Muhammad Saleem filed a complaint on 4.2.2003 alleging that
he appeared in the Middle Standard Examination under roll No. 9460 in 1998 and
secured 695 marks. He was accordingly held entitled for scholarship. He submitted
application on prescribed form for the grant of scholarship but the same had not been
paid to him. He requested for a direction to be issued to the respondent agency for
making payment of his scholarship.
The matter was taken up with the respondent agency on 18.2.2003. Executive
District Officer (Education), Jhang reported on 10.4.2003 that due to non availability of
funds for scholarship, the same could not be paid earlier. Latter the District Government
provided the requisite funds and payment of scholarship made to the complainant through
the Senior Headmaster, Government High School, Shorkot City, District Jhang. The
grievance of the complainant was redressed by the respondent agency on the intervention
of this Office.
GRANT OF SCHOLARSHIP.
Complaint No: 99/04/C.VI-07/04
Complainant Mr. Muhammad Afzal Buzdar filed complaint on 5.1.2004 alleging
therein that his daughter Shaista Afzal passed her F.A. Examination from Government
College for Women, Mianwali getting 790 marks during the session 2002. District
Education Officer (Colleges), Mianwali had granted scholarships to the girls who secured
marks from 713 or above but his daughter had been deprived of the same. The
complainant prayed that direction be issued to the respondent agency for granting
scholarship to his daughter.
After getting supporting documents from the complainant, matter was taken up
with the respondent agency on 21.2.2004. D.E.O(Colleges), Mianwali reported on
17.3.2004 that as the complainant’s daughter did not apply for special scholarship in
time, therefore, she was not granted the same. However, afterwards, applications for
merit scholarship were invited from the students and complainant’s daughter had been
sanctioned scholarship amounting to Rs.2700/- vide office order No. 2296-99 dated
21.4.2003. Thus, the grievance of the complainant was redressed by the respondent
agency on the intervention of this Office.
PAYMENT OF SCHOLARSHIP
Complaint No: 28/2004/CV-2/04
Faheem Ahmad Yousuf lodged a complaint on 1.1.2004 stating that he appeared
in Matriculation Examination under Roll No.3715 held by the Board of Intermediate and
Secondary Education, Bahawalpur in 2001. He passed the said examination securing 712
marks and got admission in Forman Christian College, Lahore. DEO(Colleges)
Bahawalnagar awarded resident scholarship to him. He informed the Principal, Forman
Christian Colleges, Lahore and also released the funds. The said amount however, was
not paid to him by the Principal of the college despite repeated requests. The complainant
requested that the requisite amount of scholarship be paid to him.
After getting supporting documents from the complainant, notice was issued to
the agency on 5.3.2004. EDO(Education) Bahawalnagar and DEO Colleges in their
report dated 26.3.2004 stated that it was correct that the complainant was awarded
internal merit scholarship for the period from 1.5.2001 to 30.4.2003 and the requisite
information was sent to F. C. College in time. Funds were also provided by
DEO(Colleges) Bahawalnagar vide letter dated 9.5.2002 and 16.1.2003 but the Principal
did not make the payment. Principal, F. C. College in his reply dated 20.4.2004 stated
that scholarship bill of the complainant had already been sent to DEO(Colleges) passed
by D.A.O Bahawalnagar, and would be paid to the complainant.
While the case was under process, Faheem Ahmad Yousuf complainant stated on
26.5.2004 that he had received cheque No.899362 dated 12.6.2004 amounting to
Rs.7,920/- on account of scholarship from the representative of DEO(Colleges)
Bahawalnagar and his grievance had been redressed.
AWARD OF SCHOLARSHIP
Muhammad Haneef had stated that his daughter Nazia Kousar passed her F.A.
Examination from district Bahawalnagar securing second position in Bahawalpur Board
obtaining 834 marks but she was not awarded scholarship. He further stated that Mavash
Akram Roll No.2735 secured 813 marks and she was awarded scholarship whereas
Zarina Kousar got 818 marks but she was not awarded scholarship.
EDO (Education) Bahawalpur stated in his report that both Mavash Akram and
Zarina Kousar who had obtained 813 and 818 marks respectively were awarded internal
merit scholarship on the ground that they got admission in B.A. after passing their F.A.
Examination. Whereas Nazia Kousar daughter of the complainant got admission in B.Sc
and that is why internal scholarship was not granted to her. In this regard he relied upon
Rule No.79 Note No.2 of the Punjab Education Code.
During the investigation of the case it came to light that Nazia Kousar had taken
up Mathematics, Economics and Arabic as her elective subjects in F.A. examination. In
her third year class she understandably and logically took up Mathematics A&B and
Statistics and this group with Mathematics A&B and Statistics is categorized as B.Sc. and
it is only a matter of Semantics terminology. Ordinarily candidates passing F.A.
examination with subjects which can be termed as pure arts subjects are not admitted to
B.Sc classes whereas candidate passing F.Sc. with pure physical science subjects are
eligible to get admission in B.A. classes. It was observed that if the regulations of the
college/university permitted a candidate who has passed F.A. examination, admission in
under graduate class with subjects which would lead to B.Sc. degree, his right to get
scholarship should be protected. Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Education
Department was therefore directed to take up review of para 79.2 of Education Code
mentioned above with a view to remove the perverseness and unreasonableness which is
evident in its present form so that the daughter of the complainant be also granted
scholarship on the basis of her performance in F.A. examination.
With the proposed amendment in the Education Code, hardship being faced by
the students who despite getting higher marks are deprived of their genuine right of
scholarship on technical ground will be alleviated.
EXCISE & TAXATION DEPARTMENT
Complaint No:C-9958/2003-Adv-II-601/2003
Fazal Muhammad in his complaint dated 11.12.2003, spelt out a grievance that
Excise & Taxation Department had imposed excessive property tax on his 7 marla
house. The matter was taken up with the Agency on 12.12.2003. In their report dated
2.1.2004, the Agency contested the complaint and contended that the property included
three shops, two of which had been rented out. It was observed that the property tax of
the complainant for the years 2001-2002 was Rs.2,318/- which was raised to Rs.12,272/-
in the subsequent year.
The Agency’s explanation was found unconvincing and a direction was issued to
District Officer Revenue (Excise & Taxation) Region-A, Lahore to dispose of the
complainant’s appeal within one month and to reassess the tax after making an accurate
measurement of the property. The unusual rise in property tax was to be explained and
an enquiry held against the Inspector who was alleged to have demanded bribe from the
complainant.
The Agency filed an implementation report that the property tax of the
complainant had been reassessed about which the complainant was satisfied. The
grievance of the complainant was thus redressed on the intervention of this Office.
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Thus the grievance of the complainant was got redressed by this office.
UPGRADATION OF POST OF MEDICAL SUPDT.
GOVT. T. B. SANITARIUM SAMLI, MURREE, RAWALPINDI TO BS-20
Complaint No:8284/03/C.VI-341/03/ADV-I
Muhammad Afzal Sajid and other residents of Gulshanabad, Adyala Road
Rawalpindi filed a complaint on 9.10.2003 stating that Government T.B. Sanitarium
Samli had been working under the direct control of Director General, Health Services,
Punjab, Lahore. People from far flung areas of Punjab came there for treatment. The said
Sanitarium had a sanctioned strength of 360 beds. The Government of the Punjab Health
Department in the year 1995 upgraded the posts of Medical Superintendents of Divisional
Headquarters Hospitals and District Headquarters Hospitals having bed strength of 250,
to BS-20. But post of Medical Superintendent of T.B. Sanitarium had not been upgraded
to BS-20 although its beds strength was 360. It was requested that direction be issued to
the Government for upgrading the post of Medical Superintendent of Govt. T. B.
Sanitarium Samli from BS-19 to BS-20 for proper functioning of the said sanitarium.
The matter was taken up with the respondent agency on 20.10.2003. The Health
Department, reported on 27.10.2004 that on receipt of sanction from the Finance
Department post of M.S. had been upgraded from BS-19 to BS-20. Thus, the grievance of
the complainants was redressed by the respondent agency on the intervention of this
Office.
ACTION AGAINST DR. SOHAIL, DR. TARIQ, DR. ARIF, DR. MUSHTAQ
AND DR. NIAZ PARVAIZ.
Complaint No.9530/03/C.VI-447/03/ADV-I
Mr. Hayat Ali alias Bhola filed complaint on 17.11.2003 stating therein that he
took his young son Muhammad Farooq, who was suffering from appendix pain to Nishtar
Hospital, Multan at about 10.00 a.m. on 9.9.2003. The doctor on duty did not attend him
immediately. He was operated by Dr. Sohail very late in the evening. His son was
discharged on 17.9.2003 although he was still feeling acute pain. He was readmitted in
the hospital on 19.9.2003. He was again operated by Dr. Tariq, Registrar but his
condition became more serious. Third operation was done by Dr. Mushtaq but instead of
relief puss started coming out from the place of operation. Fourth operation was done by
Dr. Niaz Parvez but the condition of his son further deteriorated and he expired on
25.10.2003.
Medical Superintendent, Nishtar Hospital, Multan reported that two enquires were
conducted in the matter complained against, one by Prof. Dr. Riaz Ahmad Shahbaz, Head
of Surgery Department, Nishtar College, Multan and the other by District Officer
(Revenue), Multan. In both the enquires no negligence on the part of doctors was proved.
After investigation it was noted by the Ombudsman that the District Officer
(Revenue) could not have been expected to identify the negligence and give findings on
technical issues. It was regrettably noted that report submitted by Prof. Dr. Riaz Ahmed
Shahbaz was also a narration of history of the case from the admission to death of the
patient with unreasoned conclusion of no evidence of negligence. It was observed that
‘maladministration’ in this case stood established from the fact that the condition of the
patient was not viewed seriously particularly at the time when he was first operated and
when he was discharged from the hospital although he was complaining of severe paini.
Every time a new doctor carried out the operation. Secretary to Government of the
Punjab. Health Department, Lahore was, thus, directed to constitute an Enquiry
Committee of two Professors to enquire on the following points:-
i) the patient attended to and given required immediate assistance when he was
admitted on 9.9.2003?
ii) the discharge of the patient on 17.9.2003 proper and justified when he was
complaining of acute pain?
iii) the second operation have been inevitable, if the first one had been done after
thorough investigation?
iv) the second operation done properly and if so why the operation on 20.9.2003
became necessary?
v) the breaking down of repair of first part of duodenum carried out on 17.10.2003
as pointed out by
Prof. Riaz Ahmad Shahbaz, the result of carelessness?
With these observations, case has been referred back to the Secretary Health to
furnish reasoned findings as to whether any negligence on the part of doctors is
established or otherwise.
IRRIGATION & POWER DEPARTMENT
Matter was taken up with the Executive Engineer/ Divisional Canal Officer
Ahmadpur Canal Division on 17.2.2003. He got the matter inquired by Deputy Collector
Ahmadpur Division. Patwari was found guilty in the inquiry. Penalty of stoppage of one
annual increment without future effect was, therefore, imposed upon him by the
Executive Engineer. It was further reported that a case for remission of Abiyana
amounting to Rs.18246.96/- and for raising additional demand of Rs.46,380/- had been
prepared which would be incorporated in the “Khatoni Nehr” for Kharif-2003. The
malpractice pointed out by the complainant was redressed by this Office.
Complaint No:4120/2003-POP/C-II-325/2003
Muhammad Ali and Mushtaq Ali landowners of Mauza Mangan Tehsil Shorkot
District Jhang lodged complaint on 14.5.2003 stating that Shabrati son of Siraj Din in
connivance with Ziladar had demolished the water course which supplied canal water to
their land. Consequently their standing Rabi 2003 crop had been badly affected. They
approached the concerned authorities in the matter but of no avail. The complainants
requested for intervention and redressal of their grievance.
Notice was issued to the Executive Engineer Jhang Canal Division on 19.8.2003
to submit report in the matter. Muhammad Ali the complainant appeared in this Office on
12-10-2004 and submitted in writing that water course had been restored by the
Department and their land was being irrigated properly.
Grievance of the complainants was redressed by restoring water course at site.
LABOUR & HUMAN RESOURCE DEPARTMENT
Haji Muneeb Tufail r/o House No. 4, Street No. 6, Tajpura, Shadbagh, Lahore
contended in his complaint dated 15-09-2003 that he purchased plot No. 18, Block-E,
Tajpura Scheme, Lahore in the auction held on 11-12-2002 paying Rs. 6700/- at the spot
and the balance sale price of Rs. 2,76,900/- on 07-03-2003. It revealed subsequently that
the plot had already been disposed of through auction to someone else and hence
complainant was refunded Rs. 3,43,900/- on 10-09-2003. The complainant requested for
the payment of interest to him at the rate of 17.5% and also for taking action in the
matter.
The matter was taken up with LDA, Lahore. It was reported by the Director Estate
Management, LDA that the interest claimed by the complainant was not admissible as per
terms and conditions of auction policy.
Fazal Karim r/o 214-B, Muhammad Ali Jauhar Town, Lahore requested in his
complaint dated 12.02.2004 that Mst. Sughran Bibi, his mother, owned plot No. 214-B,
Muhammad Ali Jauhar Town Scheme, Lahore. On her death, the plot was transferred by
LDA on 17.12.2000 in the names of legal heirs i.e. Fazal Karim complainant (son),
Munawar Javed (son) and three daughters. All the heirs had now given the plot to the
complainant through oral gift. The complainant approached the LDA for transferring the
plot in his name as per their policy of ‘Amicable Settlement Between Co-sharers’. As per
the said policy, LDA was to transfer the plot free of transfer fee whereas he was asked to
deposit an amount of Rs. 45,000/- as transfer fee for which challan form was also given
to him.
The matter was taken up with LDA who contended that the complainant’s case
did not fall within the ambit of their policy titled ‘Amicable Settlement Between Co-
sharers’ as the other legal heirs were transferring/ surrendering their rights in favour of
one legal heir without any consideration, compromise or settlement and that they had also
amended their policy with effect from 16.08.2004. As a result of investigation made in
this Office, it was found that the present case was fully covered by LDA policy of
‘Amicable Settlement Between Co-sharers’ promulgated in 1993. The policy did not
envisage the existence of any consideration necessary for the transfer of the plot free of
charges. Moreover, the LDA made amendment in their policy on 16.08.2004 whereas the
complainant applied for the transfer of plot in his name on 31.05.2003. Amending the
policy by LDA in August 2004 could not have been applied with retrospective effect.
It was directed that Director Estate Management, LDA shall allow free transfer of
the plot in the complainant’s name by 01.02.2005. It has been intimated by the Agency
that they have made representation dated 16.02.2005 before the Governor Punjab against
the order dated 27.12.2004 passed in the complaint.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT & RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
PAYMENT OF SALARY
Complaint No: 9358/03 D-IV-560/03
DEVELOPMENT WORK
Complaint No: 8077/03 D-IV-472/03
In their complaint dated 2.10.2003, Muhammad Munir alias Bao and other
residents of Street No.25 Fatehgarh Post Office Mughalpura, Lahore stated that Shalimar
Town Administration started laying sewerage pipes in street No.25, Takkiya Baba
Yateem Shah, Fatehgarh Lahore but work was left incomplete and the street was not
reconstructed. It was alleged that the Nazim, Union Council No.44, Fatehgarh and
Shalimar Town Administration had constructed other streets. The complainant requested
that the agency may be directed to complete the development work of their street as well.
Matter was taken up with the agency on 4.10.2003 and pursued. Sub Divisional
Officer, Mughalpura Sub Division WASA, Shalimar Town Lahore reported on 12.3.2004
that WASA had completed the sewerage according to work order/acceptance letter and
the sewer was functioning properly. Town Municipal Officer, Shalimar Town Lahore
also reported that work regarding construction of Street Baba Yateem Shar Darbar had
been completed by Town Municipal Administration. Grievance of the complainant was
redressed on the intervention of this Office.
GRANT OF MOVEOVER
Complaint No: 10072/03 D-IV-582
Complainant Mirza Shah Jehan Baig moved this complaint dated 15.12.03 stating
that he had retired as Assistant from the office of Director General, Local Government
Department Punjab, Lahore. His moveover from Scale No.11 to Scale No.12 was due
since December, 2001 but Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) deferred his case
observing that some enquiry was pending against him, whereas just two days before a no
enquiry certificate was issued and also that no departmental proceedings/action was
pending against him at the time of retirement. He prayed that a report be obtained from
the department and he may be granted moveover.
After getting supporting documents from the complainant, the matter was taken
up with the agency on 7.2.2004. Assistant Director (Admn.), Directorate General Local
Government of the Punjab Lahore reported on 16.7.2004 that grievance of the
complainant had been redressed and moveover from BS-11 to BS-12 had been cleared by
DPC in its meeting on 16.6.2004 and necessary order had been issued on 6.7.2004.
Grievance of the complainant was redressed on the intervention of this Office.
POLICE
District Police Officer Sheikhupura filed a report dated 19.1.2004 contending that
on complainant’s application submitted earlier, ASP/SDPO Ferozewala conducted a
preliminary enquiry and directed the SHO to register a criminal case. Consequently FIR
No.196/2003 dated 30.4.2003 under section 448/427/380/148 and 149 PPC was
registered at Police Station Sharqpur. During investigation, three accused were arrested
and two got pre-arrest bail from Lahore High Court, Lahore. One accused Muhammad
Khan was absconding and the challan had been submitted in court. SHO Sharqpur had
been directed to arrest Muhammad Khan immediately. Allegations of the complainant
against police officials were without substance.
It was observed that the complainant approached police on 4.4.2003 with a
request to take legal action against the accused but FIR was recorded on 30.4.2003. This
delay had not been satisfactorily explained. It had also been rightly pointed out that the
accused persons were not arrested in time. Additional District and Session Judge
Ferozewala did not confirm pre-arrest bails of Abdul Rasheed, Ashique and Sabir but the
concerned Investigating Officer failed to arrest them on the spot. He also failed to
recover the entire stolen property. One accused Muhammad Khan, whom the
complainant considers head of “Qabza Group” had not been arrested nor proceedings
under section 87 and 88 Cr. P.C initiated against him. All those facts led to the
conclusion that it was a case of mal-administration. These findings were communicated
to I.G.P. with the direction to depute a senior police officer to hold a detailed enquiry and
fix responsibility for acts of maladministration.
The Agency reported that fresh enquiry had been initiated against the delinquents.
The process of accountability thus started against the delinquent of police officials.
PAYMENT OF G. P. FUND
Complaint No: 1880/04/C.VI-228/2004
Shehnaz Bibi in her complaint dated 12.3.2004 alleged that her husband Ghulam
Muhammad Khan who was Constable in Police died on 30-12-2003. She was receiving
family pension but G. P. Fund amount was not paid to her.
After obtaining supporting documents from the complainant, report from the
Agency was invited on 21.7.2004. The Agency expedited the matter and reported on
3.9.2004 that G. P. Fund amounting to Rs.26,415/- had been paid to the complainant Mst.
Shehnaz Bibi. The grievance of the widow was, thus, redressed because of the
intervention of this Office.
Muhammad Hayat Khan s/o Hussain Khan, r/o Chak No. 625/G.B, Tehsil
Jaranwala, District Faisalabad alleged in his complaint dated 09.05.2003 that he was
present at the Sikhs Mela at Nankana Sahib on 03.11.1998 where he caught hold of one
of the four pickpockets who had stolen an amount of Rs. 26,000/- from his pocket and
handed him over to Ihsan-ul-Haq ASI, P.S. Nankana City who was on duty at the Mela
and was standing nearby. The said ASI, instead of registering a case against the
pickpocket and returning the stolen amount to the complainant, released the pickpocket
and made the complainant leave the Police Station after insulting him. Ombudsman
Punjab, vide his order dated 18.08.2004, directed the DPO Sheikhupura to arrange return
of stolen money to the complainant as the police official complained against had been
found guilty of charges as a result of enquiry conducted by the Additional S.P.
Sheikhupura.
Despite the issuance of five communications and also a show cause notice sent to
him DPO Sheikhupura neither took any steps for the return of stolen money to the
complainant nor he responded to the communications/show cause notice issued by this
Office. Chief Secretary Punjab, in these circumstances, has been sent a reference on
17.03.2005 for placing the report in the personal file/character roll of District Police
Officer, Sheikhupura as provided under section 12 (sub section 2) of the Punjab Office of
the Ombudsman Act, 1997 (Act X of 1997).
The matter was taken up with District Police Officer, Sialkot who reported that
the complainant’s ‘dera’ was raided as Constable Imdad Hussain had informed the
Inspector/SHO, P.S Sadar Pasrur that some suspects/proclaimed offenders were present
there reporting further that all this was done by the police personnel in good faith.
Investigation conducted in this Office established a series of acts of high handedness,
arbitrariness and gross illegality as Imdad Hussain Constable provided wrong information
to his seniors, ASI Abdul Aziz conducted the raid without satisfying himself about the
veracity of the information, SHO authorized the raid without satisfying himself about the
information, complainant’s two servants were taken to the Police Station where they were
kept in wrongful confinement without any justification and the complainant’s gun was
also taken into possession illegally. What was even more distressing was that District
Police Officer, Sialkot did not find these acts to be worth cognizance and came to the
totally unconvincing conclusion that the complaint was devoid of any substance.
PRISONS
Matter was taken up with the concerned I.G. Prisons on 16.9.2003 who awarded
requisite remission to the complainant and was released from Jail on 12.9.2003. On the
intervention of this Office, complainant’s grievance was redressed.
Muhammad Jehangir Bhatti, Naib Nazim U.C. 140 Sargodha and 21 other
Nazims/Naib Nazims sought intervention of this office on 14.6.2003 for initiating
disciplinary action against Ch. Mohammad Ilyas, Deputy Superintendent, District Jail
Sargodha on charges of indulgence in immoral activities, holding a dance and drink
function at his residence.
Matter was taken up with the I.G. Prisons, Punjab on 7.7.2003 who held inquiry
into the allegations by DIG prisons on 5.9.2003. As a consequence, competent authority
placed the accused officer under suspension and formal proceedings against him under
the Punjab Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance 2000 were ordered.
Deputy Secretary Home Department was appointed as Inquiry Officer in the case.
The complaint stood fructified, since formal disciplinary proceedings were
initiated on the intervention of this office.
PUNJAB UNIVERSITY
PAYMENT OF DUES
Complaint No: 8342/2003 D-III-561/2003.
Syed Tasawar Hussain Shah, SST, Govt. High School No.1, Chakwal submitted a
complaint on 11.10.2003, that he performed duties as Deputy Superintendent Govt. Post
Graduate College, Chakwal, to conduct BA/B.Sc Examination during 1998, but necessary
dues thereof, had not been paid to him by the Agency despite repeated requests.
Matter was taken up with the Treasurer, University of the Punjab Lahore. A sum
of Rs.1950/- was paid by the Agency to the complainant vide Cheque No.0848000, dated
23.12.2003.
The grievance of the complainant was, got redressed on intervention of this
Office.
ISSUANCE OF DEGREE
Complaint No: 7191/2003 D-III 473/2003
Ishtiaq Ahmad S/o Muhammad Sharif, R/o Village Renotra, P.O. Chak Baley
Khan, Tehsil & District Rawalpindi, complained on 2.9.2003, that he appeared in the
B.Ed Annual Examination 1995, under Roll No.593 but his B.Ed. degree had not been
issued by the Agency despite passage of considerable time.
Matter was taken up with the Agency. As a result the requisite degree was issued
by the Agency to the complainant on 8.1.2004. The grievance of the complainant was got
redressed.
Mr. Waqar Elahi on 30.4.2003, complained against WASA Lahore for sending
bills on commercial rates in respect of his residential property. The property in question
(S-19-R-82) was owned by his father-in-law and was being used by him for the last 20
years. In the property, a domestic connection has been obtained, which was being billed
previously @Rs.141/- for two months. Since May 2002, WASA Authorities started
sending bills at the commercial rate amounting to Rs.2360/-. Deputy Director, WASA,
Samanabad, Lahore had taken no action/failed to correct his bill on his application dated
13.5.2002, inspite of his repeated visits. Up to March 2003, the amount of arrears
accumulated to Rs.7800/-. The complainant requested for redressal of his grievance.
A report was obtained from the Agency. Mr. Maqsood Ahmad, Legal Assistant,
Revenue Directorate WASA, Shah Jamal, Lahore submitted a written statement on
19.6.2004 to the effect that the grievance of the complainant had been redressed and
revised bill would be delivered to him in the next billing cycle. Accordingly, the
complaint stood fructified.