To overshadow the reports of massive financial mismanagement and corruption in fruit and vegetable markets the Provincial Agriculture Ministry, instead of giving mature consideration to reports, has decided to auction the entire market committee assets through open auction.
The corruption reports appearing in press cannot be overruled as the reports were based on undeniable facts but the auction of market committee assets, plagued with corruption, could be described as 'travesty' which led to speculation about the credibility of provincial Agriculture Ministry.
The auction of market committees is legal under the amended clause of Agriculture Produce Act 1939 rule 1940 but at the same time it is misleading as the corruption charges against the market committee officials have not been evaluated nor the market committees vehicles illegally possess and utilised by the officials of Sindh Agriculture Secretariat withdrawn and restore to market committees.
According to confirmed reports no less than three Margala GS, one Khyber, one Mehran, a second-hand white colour Pajero purchased by the former provincial Agriculture Minister from the Market Committee Pool fund is also at the disposal of some high-up who is not entitled to use official vehicles.
A PS to minister, and his brother running a private business were often seen driving the GS number plate vehicle with impunity while the respective market committees are bearing the whole cost of their petrol and maintenance running into millions of rupees. Yet the whole issue was hushed up.
Assets of all market committees of the province have been auctioned on transparent matter except of Ghotki and Larkana districts, which will be held later this month. But the auction need confirmation of the ministry before handing over of the committees to successful bidders, which is not coming forthwith.
However, the Director, Market Committee, was seen having courtship with the successful bidders.
Meanwhile, fruit and vegetable market committees, which were established under the Agriculture Produce Act 1939 rules, 1940 as self-financing corporate bodies with the objective to arrange marketing of agriculture produce, supervise correct weighment, timely payment of price, issue of licence to brokers and provide facilities of warehouse and cold storage to growers but unfortunately till date the facilities enshrined in Act have not translate into certainty with the result that the issue remains a bone of contention between the licensed brokers and market committee officials.
According to sources, the bid money deposited by the successful bidders is being spent for reimbursing the outstanding salaries of market committee staff and also for granting loans which might create problems in completion of development work.
A leading rice grower and exporter has already lodged protest against the auction of the market committee while leading growers organisations and some traders might also lodge their protest against provincial government decision.