The Auditor General of Pakistan has raised serious objections over heavy perks and non-transparent recruitments in the Power Planning and Monitoring Company (PPMC). It is noteworthy that this company was established as a replacement for the former Pakistan Electric Power Company.
According to sources, several irregularities related to policy and implementation were identified during the financial year 2024–25. A report revealed that in February 2025, the company advertised nine positions for Management Trainee Officers (MTOs), for which 2,940 applications were received and 822 candidates were shortlisted. However, during the recruitment process, the number of positions was gradually increased first to 25 and then to 28 without issuing any fresh advertisement or corrigendum, which constitutes a violation of transparent recruitment principles.
The audit further found that although selected candidates were unavailable in some departments and alternative candidates were offered appointments, offer letters were not issued in the finance department despite the availability of suitable candidates. It was also observed that different selection criteria were applied across various categories. In some departments, candidates with lower assessment scores were selected, whereas higher standards were applied for MTO Finance, resulting in the position remaining vacant. According to the report, overall, 16 out of the 28 approved positions are still vacant.
Sources said the Auditor General attributed these issues to weak implementation, unclear workforce planning, and lack of transparency. Due to these irregularities, the organization faced staff shortages, increased workload because of delays, and a decline in confidence in the recruitment system. The matter was placed before the management in December 2025, but no response was received.
Additionally, an objection was raised over the payment of Rs 0.780 million to the company’s Managing Director, Abid Lodhi, as board meeting fees. The report stated that no written authorization or formal board decision could be produced to justify this payment. Since the MD was already receiving a regular salary, the separate payment of board fees was termed as double benefits.
The report recommended that the company ensure transparency, uniform criteria, and timely implementation in future recruitments, and that any administrative perks be paid only with clear approval to prevent violations of rules and misuse of public resources.
