Peshawar Squash Court Project: Discrepancies in Finance, Signature Controversy, Low-Quality Construction, and the Enigma of the "Contingency Fund"

 

Musarrat Ullah Jan – Kikxnow Digital Creator

Sports development projects in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa are again at the center of questions. The project to construct a squash court at Government High School No. 1, Peshawar, has become a benchmark not only for construction defects but also for financial discrepancies and administrative uncertainty.

The PC-I document of the project puts the total cost at Rs. 12.62 million. But in a January 1, 2020 letter released by the Sports and Tourism Department, the cost of the same project was quoted as Rs. 13.62 million. There is a Rs. 1 million difference here that raises immediate questions: where did this additional amount come from, and how was it justified?

When asked for comment, the then Peshawar District Sports Officer refused to comment. But Ahmed Ali from the Engineering Wing clarified that the additional Rs. 1 million was given for "contingency" and "advertisement charges." This clarification, however, only brings about more questions:

Why would 8% of the entire project cost (Rs. 1 million out of Rs. 12.62 million) be reserved for contingency and advertisement only?

Is this expenditure as per PWD Code and Finance Department guidelines?

Are there proper receipts and expenditure records to support such expenses?

The PC-IV report of the project bears signatures from just two individuals — one from the Engineering Wing and the DSO Peshawar — whereas such projects usually need an authentic committee comprising Development and Engineering representatives.

Adding to the ambiguity, the same official signed in other projects as a Regional Sports Officer (RSO), although no satisfactory record exists of when exactly she was legally appointed as RSO. This inconsistency is likely to raise doubts whether officials might have employed interchangeable designations in order to process approvals according to convenience.

Sources also indicate that inferior materials were utilized during the construction of the squash court, when it was specifically stated in the letter that:

"Executing Agency shall strictly adhere to the rules/guidelines and maintain quality standards."

In terms of the Delegation of Financial Powers Rules 2018 (KP), administrative approval grants only spending authority. Full responsibility for quality and transparency rests with the implementing agency. Under the PWD Code, the Engineer Incharge and supervising team are personally responsible for maintaining quality, and in situations of poor quality work or over-pricing, responsibility rests with both the contractor and the Engineering Wing.

This gives rise to a number of serious questions:

On what basis was the cost indicated as Rs. 13.62 million in the official letter rather than the Rs. 12.62 million indicated in PC-I?

Was the Rs. 1 million actually spent only on contingency and ads? Yes, if so, where is the proof?

Why was the same officer signing both as DSO and RSO in different projects? Was it as per rules?

 

Why has nothing been done about the shoddy construction despite there being clear rules and guidelines?

Will the audit and utilization report of the project ever be publicized?

The Peshawar squash court project is another case of the increasing irregularities in sports development works. From financial irregularities and a dubious "contingency and advertisement" fund to signature vagueness and shoddy construction, the project reflects how public money — taxpayers' money — continues to be dealt with in a secretive and unaccountable way.

#Peshawar #SquashCourt #SportsCorruption #PublicFunds #ContingencyFund #AdvertisementCharges #PWDCode #Accountability #KhyberPakhtunkhwa #InvestigativeReport #Audit