LAHORE - The Punjab government has lodged an FIR against officers of Iqbal Town Municipal Administration with Anti-Corruption Establishment in a haste and without thorough probe, reveals a report of a sensitive agency sent to the secretary local government and Community Development department. The Punjab government is getting a bad name by instituting such frivolous cases against government employees for the purpose to discredit the local bodies system and to victimise political opponents, the report suggests. Referring to the FIR 64/08 dated October 25, 2008, the report states that 'all seven allegations levelled in the FIR show biasness of the inquiry officer toward a targeted TMA'. "A senior officer of the LG&CD was investigating the affairs of the TMA. All of a sudden an FIR with allegations not maintainable was lodged by a deputy director (Inspection) with ACE against 14 persons who worked with the TMA from 2005 onward". Pointing reasons that showed biased nature of the FIR, the report states that certain questions raised are still unanswered. "Almost all officers who served as TMOs, TO (F), TO (R) and clerks upto the caretaker government are included in the FIR and those transferred to the TMA in Shahbaz Sharif regime are excluded. DD Inspection, the inquiry officer, openly admitted in the presence of employees of Iqbal Town that he had got an opportunity to teach a lesson to the officers. License fee accounts of Nishter Town, Data Gunj Bukhsh Town, Samanabad Town and Gulberg Town were not enquired even after massive irregularities pointed by the DCO Lahore", the report suggested. Referring to the allegation that TO (R) issued an unauthorised notice to Atlas Honda to pay license fee of Rs 150,000 as per notification of defunct Zila Council, the report suggested that Atlas Honda deposited license fee in the account of Iqbal Town from 2002 to 2006. On getting information, the town nazim rightly waved off this fee as it was not part of the schedule and told Atlas Honda to furnish request for the refund of collected fee. There was no complaint and all cheques received from Atlas Honda were deposited to the account of the TMA. The charge should be dropped as the practice was not done with bad faith. To the allegation that a cheque presented by Atlas Honda in 2005 was not deposited to the TMA account, the report clarifies that the cheque was deposited in the TMA account on September 19, 2005 as shown on the deposit slip and account statement of the TMA. To the allegation of contractor collecting unauthorised license fee through AV books of the TMA, the report says that TMAs give books to contractors which should be returned back. But in some cases only partial books are returned. The responsibility of any embezzlement should be fixed after reconciling the accounts of license fee of City District Government, union councils and other TMAs. The influential license fee mafia should be identified and the illegally taken amount should be ascertained and recovered. To the allegation that TMOs and TOs were party to the illegal activities of contractor and they cheated the DCO and EDO Revenue, the report suggests that the letter of DCO dated August 24, 2006 was general in nature which was duly replied by the TMO. The DCO was at liberty to contact ultimate arbitrator secretary LG&CD. The second letter of EDO Revenue states that contractor has sent recovery of license fee notice to Allied Paint Industry despite that the such industry falls under the CDG purview. But according to the notification of items of license fee, glass and polish paint industry falls under the TMA. It was the responsibility of the secretary LG&CD to resolve the issue between the CDG and the TMA. As such the allegation that the contractor was collecting fee illegally with the connivance of town officials could not be proved. To the allegation that large number of cheques were collected by contractor TTIP Shahbaz Ahmed and others in connivance of the TMA staff and deposited them in account of other contractors, the report points out that license fee contract was awarded to Haji Ismail. He is also partner of Shahbaz Ahmed TTIP along with two other partners. Haji Gul Marjan and Iqbal, contractors of slaughterhouse in 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively are also partners of Haji Ismail. If any cheque deposited in accounts of TTIP and or slaughterhouse in July, August 2007-08 may be profits of contractor of license fee 2006-07. He has all the rights to deposit the revenue generated by license fee in 2006-07 and deposit it in other accounts of the TMA as he has earned this amount above Rs 22 lakh he paid to Iqbal Town. However, there is no proof that cheques were deposited to other accounts. Referring to the allegation that books of TMA have been concealed to cover unauthorised collection, the report questions that how all officers, superintendents and clerks could join hands. To the seventh allegation of involvement of contractor and all subsequent TMOs, TO (F) and TO (R) for three years in the issuance of forged notification of license fee book containing 215 items, the report questions that if this book was produced in 2005 and remained in use upto 2008, then why no complaint was lodged with CM, ACE, NAB, intelligence agencies, secretary LG&CD, DCO or town nazim. How this book containing 215 items come in the possession of certain officials of the LG&CD.