Chief Secretary Balochistan Captain (r) Fazeel Asghar has returned the cash bonus of Rs 3.3 million that he had awarded to himself for the 'additional work' during the preparation of the fiscal budget, as an 'austerity measure', after he was served with a legal notice.
On Thursday, a journalist revealed in a Twitter post that the chief secretary had rewarded himself despite that he hadn't done anything as portrayed.
Bayzeed Kharoti, journalist and social media activist, served a legal notice to the secretary the other day, saying the total bonus cash withdrawn illegally from the national exchequer in terms of the fiscal year budget stood at 2,40,00,000.
He maintained that the "drivers, gardeners and scavengers of your office, who had no concern with the budget affairs, [were] additionally unlawfully remunerated in millions. The act wasn't only against the law, but it is also equal to misfeasance during the conduct of your office."
According to the communique, following in the footstep of the chief secretary's office, the employees of others offices, namely finance, planning and development department, Balochistan Assembly, Chief Minister's Secretariat and Governor's House had drawn a four- month cash in the name of the bonus.
The journalist, in his legal notice, demanded the chief secretary return the amount to the exchequer for the better interest of the people of the province, and publicly apologise for setting a wrong precedence and making an illegal move, or else a case will be lodged in this regard.
The Fundamental Role 46(B) of the government states that the provincial government can acknowledge extraordinary work by a civil servant by rewarding them from the general revenue, but also present valid reason of honorary cash through a written statement.
The sub clause of the role stresses upon two necessary conditions for the purpose. A. The prerequisite permission of competent authority for the exceptional work. 2. Specification of a cash bonus in advance.
The role also interprets that the head of the departments are bound to pay only rupees 2,000 as an honorary payment to a civil servant in an individual case, adding that the higher authority can only award a person once in a year.
On Thursday, a journalist revealed in a Twitter post that the chief secretary had rewarded himself despite that he hadn't done anything as portrayed.
Bayzeed Kharoti, journalist and social media activist, served a legal notice to the secretary the other day, saying the total bonus cash withdrawn illegally from the national exchequer in terms of the fiscal year budget stood at 2,40,00,000.
He maintained that the "drivers, gardeners and scavengers of your office, who had no concern with the budget affairs, [were] additionally unlawfully remunerated in millions. The act wasn't only against the law, but it is also equal to misfeasance during the conduct of your office."
According to the communique, following in the footstep of the chief secretary's office, the employees of others offices, namely finance, planning and development department, Balochistan Assembly, Chief Minister's Secretariat and Governor's House had drawn a four- month cash in the name of the bonus.
The journalist, in his legal notice, demanded the chief secretary return the amount to the exchequer for the better interest of the people of the province, and publicly apologise for setting a wrong precedence and making an illegal move, or else a case will be lodged in this regard.
The Fundamental Role 46(B) of the government states that the provincial government can acknowledge extraordinary work by a civil servant by rewarding them from the general revenue, but also present valid reason of honorary cash through a written statement.
The sub clause of the role stresses upon two necessary conditions for the purpose. A. The prerequisite permission of competent authority for the exceptional work. 2. Specification of a cash bonus in advance.
The role also interprets that the head of the departments are bound to pay only rupees 2,000 as an honorary payment to a civil servant in an individual case, adding that the higher authority can only award a person once in a year.