Funds allocated for development, not taken by individuals, Cumilla district administrator admits to Hasnat
Hasnat claimed that Mostak said journalists may not have published his full statement.
Cumilla-4 MP Md Abul Hasnat, popularly known as Hasnat Abdullah, has released a phone recording in response to allegations that he and NCP spokesperson Asif Mahmud Shojib Bhuyain took Tk25 crore from Cumilla Zilla Parishad, claiming the council administrator later clarified that the funds were allocated for development work rather than to individuals.
In a Facebook post yesterday (30 May), Hasnat, the National Citizen Party (NCP) chief organiser (south), said Cumilla Zilla Parishad Administrator Mostak Mia made remarks at a BNP programme that created the impression that he and Asif had personally taken money from the district council.
The controversy began the same day after Mostak, who is the ruling BNP's Cumilla divisional organising secretary, alleged, while speaking at a discussion and prayer programme marking the 45th martyrdom anniversary of BNP founder Ziaur Rahman, that Asif took Tk15 crore from Cumilla Zilla Parishad while Hasnat took Tk10 crore.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
In his post, Hasnat said the administrator's remarks contained at least two false claims.
According to Hasnat, the allocation did not come from the council's own revenue fund.
He said Debidwar upazila received funding through an Annual Development Programme (ADP) project under the Local Government Division, which was implemented through the district council.
"Debidwar received Tk5 crore under an ADP project. This has no connection with the zilla parishad's revenue fund," he wrote.
Hasnat also rejected the claim that the money was given to him personally. He said the funds were spent on 42 separate projects through the district and upazila administrations and that records of all expenditures were preserved in government documents.
He said he contacted Mostak to seek clarification over the remarks. According to Hasnat, the administrator admitted that the funds were allocated for development work and not to any individual.
Hasnat also claimed that Mostak said journalists may not have published his full statement.
Sharing the phone recording, Hasnat wrote that the administrator acknowledged the allocation was made for development purposes and not for any individual.
He further said allocations from the district council to upazilas are a routine budgetary practice and that the funds allocated for Debidwar were spent through the upazila administration.
Hasnat argued that portraying the allocation as money taken by individuals was misleading and said all records related to the allocation and expenditure are available in official government documents.
In a separate video message posted on his verified Facebook page yesterday, NCP spokesperson Asif Mahmud Shojib Bhuyain also rejected the allegation, saying some media reports had portrayed the issue as if he had taken Tk15 crore and Hasnat Abdullah Tk10 crore personally.
He argued that development budget allocations cannot be equated with individuals taking money.
Asif said the Local Government Division and Ministry of Cooperatives allocate special funds for development projects through local government bodies, while special allocations are approved based on applications and needs. According to Asif, the Cumilla Zilla Parishad administrator had confused revenue expenditure with special allocations, adding that revenue funds cannot be separately allocated to individuals or specific areas.
Asif further said special allocations are spent based on decisions taken by local committees headed by administrators or chairpersons. Referring to a February 2025 Cumilla Zilla Parishad meeting, he said funds were approved for projects including solar lights, employment programmes, educational institution furniture and mosque renovation works.
He added that the funds are spent through e-tendering and in accordance with public procurement rules, leaving no scope for him or Hasnat Abdullah to influence their use. He also urged the administrator to clarify the remarks and said legal action could be considered otherwise.
