At a time when Pakistan faces a persistent resource crunch, state institutions are moving forward with expenditures that many citizens might deem avoidable. The Capital Development Authority (CDA) has recently floated tenders worth approximately Rs.4.6 million for procuring kitchen appliances and installing air conditioners at the official residences of two Supreme Court judges.
Details of the Tendered Works
According to official documents, the civic body issued two separate tenders. One tender is for the procurement of kitchen-related equipment at the official residence of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Yahya Afridi. The other tender is for the installation of air conditioners at Residence No. 16 in the Judges Enclave, Islamabad, which is allotted to Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan.
The financial breakdown reveals a tentative cost estimate of Rs. 3,053,231 for the air conditioning work at Justice Afghan's residence. Meanwhile, an amount of Rs. 1,549,629 has been earmarked for the kitchen appliances at Chief Justice Afridi's official residence.
Official Justification and Additional Works
Officials from the concerned CDA formations confirmed that these tenders are part of the routine maintenance and furnishing of judges' residences. They clarified that these accommodations are classified as state lodges. Such expenditures, they stated, are processed in strict accordance with the Federal Government's entitlement schedule for state-allotted accommodations.
The tenders invite bids from registered suppliers for the supply, delivery, and installation of the specified equipment. The estimated cost for these projects is valid until January 2, 2026.
In a related development, the CDA is also set to undertake electrification works at Office No. 307 within the Supreme Court Building. The estimated cost for this additional project is Rs. 842,908.
Context and Public Perception
This move by the CDA comes against a backdrop of widespread economic challenges where the public expects austerity and careful fiscal management from all state institutions. While officials defend the spending as routine and rule-based, it is likely to spark debate about the prioritization of government funds during a period of national financial constraint. The juxtaposition of significant expenditure on judges' residences with the country's broader resource crunch raises questions about the optics and necessity of such spending at this particular time.
