EXCLUSIVE: Ushirikiano wa Makampuni ya Mafuta na CCM

[MFILIPINO]

yule mama rahma kharoos ( balozi wa polisi jamii) if am not mistaken ana kampuni kani vile ya mafuta! hahahah nchi ya baba, mama mdogo, mtoto( prince) na mashemej from DUBAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!

 

[satellite]

CAMEL inamilikiwa na Rostam plus Riziwani kikwete ss unategemea nn hapo?

 

[Kiranja]

Kuna hoja inajengwa hivi sasa kuwa tatizo ni fomula iliyotumiwa na EWURA katika kupata ama kukokotoa bei , na hili lina mambo makubwa sana nyuma yake .Nyaraka zinafuata hapo baadae kidogo.

 

[Kiranja]

ENERGY AND WATER UTILITIES REGULATORY AUTHORITY (EWURA)
​

BOARD PAPER NO: ……. DATED 26 JULY 2011
​

STAFF APPRAISALS​

​

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this paper is to submit recommendations to the Board of Directors for the Board to approve the renewal or non-renewal of the contracts for members of staff who were employed by the Authority in 2006 and have contract end date as of 31 July 2011 to 30 November 2011.

2. BACKGROUND

As the Authority nears its fifth anniversary since establishment, contracts for approximately 30% of current staff members who were employed during the first year of operation are coming to an end. In the interest of continuity and institutional memory, the Director General sought to undertake the Staff Appraisals to be used as the basis for contract renewal and/or termination, as appropriate.


In all, twenty-nine members of staff ranging in seniority from Levels 2-10 were apprised over a three month period. Eleven of these members of staff are in Levels 2-3 and have contracts that must be reviewed by the Board, while the remaining eighteen are in Levels 4-10 whose contracts are under the purview of the Director General.


3. OBJECTIVE OF THE PAPER

The objective of this paper is to present recommendations to the Board of Directors, for the Board to approve the renewal or non-renewal of contracts for eleven members of staff in Levels 2-3, as a result of staff appraisals that were conducted by the Director General during the period of March to June, 2011.



4. STAFF APPRAISAL

A total of twenty-nine employees, with contract end dates ranging from 31 July 2011 to 30 November 2011, ranging in seniority level 2-10, were appraised by the Director General as part of end of contract assessment. See Annex 1 for complete list of all staff members that were apprised.


The appraisals were done over the course of three months whereby members of staff were asked to rank their performance, over the period of their contract, and were also given the opportunity to voice any concerns and/or opinions on the current status of the Authority. Furthermore, members were encouraged to share opinions of how best to improve upon the Authority's successes and suggest ways forward. The feedback from these appraisals, were taken into account when preparing recommendations, regarding the new organizational structure, for the Authority and in revising the Strategic Plan. See Annex 2, a matrix containing all comments and recommendations made by staff.


Each appraisal lasted between fifteen to thirty minutes and was conducted as a hybrid of an informal meeting and an interview. At the end of the appraisal, the staff member received a ‘grade mark' ranging from A to F (excellent to unsatisfactory) which was reflective of his/her performance rating throughout the term of employment as assessed by the Director General. Other factors which were considered when determining the grades given to each member of staff include the following: professional conduct with respect to the individual's responsibilities and duties; communication skills; team work and participation; leadership skills and contribution to the Authority during the term of employment.


A grade of ‘D' or above garnered the recipient a recommendation for contract renewal while a grade of ‘E' or below earned one a recommendation for non-renewal of their contract and subsequent re-advertising of the position. Table 1 summarizes the grading structure used during appraisals.


Table 1: Grading Structure

Grade​	Performance ranking	Recommendation
A​	Excellent	Offer to renew contract
B​	Very good	Offer to renew contract
C​	Good	Offer to renew contract
D​	Satisfactory	Offer to renew contract
E​	Poor	Not renew the contract and advertise the position
F​	Unsatisfactory	Not renew the contract and advertise the position

5. OUTCOME OF STAFF APPRAISALS

On average, most staff received a grade of either ‘B' or ‘C', a small number received ‘A' and only two persons received grades that are below satisfactory level (one ‘E' and one ‘F').


The breakdown of grades given to the members of staff in Levels 2-3 is listed in Table 2 below. The full list of grades given to members of staff is listed in Annex 1 and submitted to the Board for information only.

Table 2: Summary of Grades Received for Levels 2-3

Grade​	Performance ranking	Recommendation	Level 2: Directors	Level 3: Managers
A​	Excellent	Offer to renew contract	Director of Corporate Affairs; Director of Regulatory Economics	Head of Procurement Management Unit; Chief Internal Auditor; Commercial Manager - Electricity
B​	Very good	Offer to renew contract	Director of Natural Gas; Director of Water and Sewerage	Technical Manager – Water and Sewerage
C​	Good	Offer to renew contract	Director of Legal Services	Technical Manager – Petroleum; Principal Communications and Public Relations Officer
D​	Satisfactory	Offer to renew contract	Director of Electricity	-
E​	Poor	Not renew the contract and advertise the position	Director of Petroleum	-
F​	Unsatisfactory	Not renew the contract and advertise the position	-	Manager of Regulatory Economics

Tables 3-4 list evaluation comments of each member of staff in Levels 2-3 as taken from the Staff Appraisal.

Table 3: Summary of Remarks from Appraisal of Level 2 Directors

Item	Position	Remarks from Appraisal
1.	Director of Natural Gas	Commended for frequent positive contribution to organizational framework with regards to cross-cutting sector issues. Cautioned on weakness in communication and interpersonal skills.
2.	Director of Legal Services	Credited for being intelligent, loyal, and trustworthy and keenly follows regulations. Also credited with very good command of the English language. Has been acting DG more often than anyone else. However, she was cautioned for being media shy; procrastinating on issues of concern ; overly cautious when it comes to expressing her views and opinion; and slow pace of licensing. Consequently, she rarely volunteers any advice and has been overshadowed by her juniors. Although she is supposed to be the one writing minutes of the Board, she has delegated this responsibility to her juniors. Lack of supervision has resulted in minutes being prepared late, resulting in admonition by the Board and Board Committees, with the Director General having to apologize on several occasions. As a result of her procrastination, she never made good her promise to become an Advocate after she had been appointed Secretary to the Board. To date, she is yet to present her petition in that regard. Regrettably, most of her juniors are now qualified advocates while she is not. It is recommended that renewal of her contract should be accompanied with a condition for her to become an advocate within six months from the date of contract renewal.
3.	Director of Petroleum	Cautioned on perceptions that he is not a team-player within the organizational structure, that he is possessive of the petroleum division and that he is selective on issues regarding licensing. Further cautioned that he is given to the application of double standards in dealing with cases of a similar nature. Has been known to sign off on matters that merit the Director General's attention in a manner that his peers/subordinates have construed as attempts to protect selected operators. Engages in back biting of colleagues and superiors. Generally in poor health that has been linked to irresponsible drinking habits that resulted in the Board giving him a stern warning in 2009. He claims to have stopped drinking but has had to be given special medical attention when he travelled abroad to Djibouti and Malawi in 2010. Generally intelligent but intolerant to opposing views. Tends to intimidate "non-confirming" juniors and is considered as arrogant by peers.
4.	Director of Electricity	He is a nice, gentle, religious person. Commended for being trustworthy, loyal and easy to work with. However, he is challenged in terms of oral communication skills and punctuates every other sentence with an "eer". Generally complacent and reacts to issues often raised by other staff who seem to be worried of inaction from his division. He has not handled well matters relating to the licensing of electricity contractors. As a result, no report is yet to be submitted to the Board with regard to this activity for the past two years. He managed a ‘flawed' process that improperly usurped the powers of the Board to issue licenses. Cautioned on the slow pace of turning benefits of international cooperation so that it is reflected in EWURA rules and regulation; lack of monitoring system and independent data in Directorate when compared with Petrol and Water Divisions; and on lack of innovation in Electricity Directorate, such that perceptions were that he tends to be satisfied with the status quo.
5.	Director of Regulatory Economics	Commended for his contribution to the organizational structure. Under his tenure, he assisted with setting up an information system, pricing template and verifying financial viability of applicants. He admitted lack of awareness in natural gas sector which he attributed to lack of reference data and given that the sector is still in its infancy stage.
6.	Director of Water and Sewerage	Commended for very good supervisory skills with respect to development of water sector and incremental approach to problem solving. Experience as an operator, good contacts with German development partners and previous background with ministry helped with development of the division. Under his tenure, the Authority has continued to take on more responsibility in the water sector. There has been increased engagement from the utility authorities which has lead to ever increasing acceptance of EWURA as a regulator by the utility authorities.
7.	Director of Corporate Affairs	Credited with consecutive good audit reports, improved staff welfare, loans and pension funds during his tenure.

 

[Kiranja]

soma eneo la director of petroleum ....then connect the dots .........

 

[Kiranja]

soma faida wanayopata hawa jamaa kila lita ni kiasi gani. Then unganisheni na hoja ambazo zinafanyiwa kazi kutokana na lalamiko kuwa hawana faida kumbe ni uongo .Angalia kila lita moja wanalipwa kiasi gani cha fedha.

View attachment 35149

 

[Kiranja]

Mikataba ya CCM will follow soon...........

 

[kweleakwelea]

lete nuziiii papa kIRANJA!!!!

 

[DSN]

ENERGY AND WATER UTILITIES REGULATORY AUTHORITY (EWURA)
BOARD PAPER NO: ……. DATED 26 JULY 2011
STAFF APPRAISALS​

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this paper is to submit recommendations to the Board of Directors for the Board to approve the renewal or non-renewal of the contracts for members of staff who were employed by the Authority in 2006 and have contract end date as of 31 July 2011 to 30 November 2011.

2. BACKGROUND

As the Authority nears its fifth anniversary since establishment, contracts for approximately 30% of current staff members who were employed during the first year of operation are coming to an end. In the interest of continuity and institutional memory, the Director General sought to undertake the Staff Appraisals to be used as the basis for contract renewal and/or termination, as appropriate.


In all, twenty-nine members of staff ranging in seniority from Levels 2-10 were apprised over a three month period. Eleven of these members of staff are in Levels 2-3 and have contracts that must be reviewed by the Board, while the remaining eighteen are in Levels 4-10 whose contracts are under the purview of the Director General.


3. OBJECTIVE OF THE PAPER

The objective of this paper is to present recommendations to the Board of Directors, for the Board to approve the renewal or non-renewal of contracts for eleven members of staff in Levels 2-3, as a result of staff appraisals that were conducted by the Director General during the period of March to June, 2011.



4. STAFF APPRAISAL

A total of twenty-nine employees, with contract end dates ranging from 31 July 2011 to 30 November 2011, ranging in seniority level 2-10, were appraised by the Director General as part of end of contract assessment. See Annex 1 for complete list of all staff members that were apprised.


The appraisals were done over the course of three months whereby members of staff were asked to rank their performance, over the period of their contract, and were also given the opportunity to voice any concerns and/or opinions on the current status of the Authority. Furthermore, members were encouraged to share opinions of how best to improve upon the Authority's successes and suggest ways forward. The feedback from these appraisals, were taken into account when preparing recommendations, regarding the new organizational structure, for the Authority and in revising the Strategic Plan. See Annex 2, a matrix containing all comments and recommendations made by staff.


Each appraisal lasted between fifteen to thirty minutes and was conducted as a hybrid of an informal meeting and an interview. At the end of the appraisal, the staff member received a ‘grade mark' ranging from A to F (excellent to unsatisfactory) which was reflective of his/her performance rating throughout the term of employment as assessed by the Director General. Other factors which were considered when determining the grades given to each member of staff include the following: professional conduct with respect to the individual's responsibilities and duties; communication skills; team work and participation; leadership skills and contribution to the Authority during the term of employment.


A grade of ‘D' or above garnered the recipient a recommendation for contract renewal while a grade of ‘E' or below earned one a recommendation for non-renewal of their contract and subsequent re-advertising of the position. Table 1 summarizes the grading structure used during appraisals.


Table 1: Grading Structure

Grade​	Performance ranking	Recommendation
A​	Excellent	Offer to renew contract
B​	Very good	Offer to renew contract
C​	Good	Offer to renew contract
D​	Satisfactory	Offer to renew contract
E​	Poor	Not renew the contract and advertise the position
F​	Unsatisfactory	Not renew the contract and advertise the position

5. OUTCOME OF STAFF APPRAISALS

On average, most staff received a grade of either ‘B' or ‘C', a small number received ‘A' and only two persons received grades that are below satisfactory level (one ‘E' and one ‘F').


The breakdown of grades given to the members of staff in Levels 2-3 is listed in Table 2 below. The full list of grades given to members of staff is listed in Annex 1 and submitted to the Board for information only.

Table 2: Summary of Grades Received for Levels 2-3

Grade​	Performance ranking	Recommendation	Level 2: Directors	Level 3: Managers
A​	Excellent	Offer to renew contract	Director of Corporate Affairs; Director of Regulatory Economics	Head of Procurement Management Unit; Chief Internal Auditor; Commercial Manager - Electricity
B​	Very good	Offer to renew contract	Director of Natural Gas; Director of Water and Sewerage	Technical Manager – Water and Sewerage
C​	Good	Offer to renew contract	Director of Legal Services	Technical Manager – Petroleum; Principal Communications and Public Relations Officer
D​	Satisfactory	Offer to renew contract	Director of Electricity	-
E​	Poor	Not renew the contract and advertise the position	Director of Petroleum	-
F​	Unsatisfactory	Not renew the contract and advertise the position	-	Manager of Regulatory Economics

Tables 3-4 list evaluation comments of each member of staff in Levels 2-3 as taken from the Staff Appraisal.

Table 3: Summary of Remarks from Appraisal of Level 2 Directors

Item	Position	Remarks from Appraisal
1.	Director of Natural Gas	Commended for frequent positive contribution to organizational framework with regards to cross-cutting sector issues. Cautioned on weakness in communication and interpersonal skills.
2.	Director of Legal Services	Credited for being intelligent, loyal, and trustworthy and keenly follows regulations. Also credited with very good command of the English language. Has been acting DG more often than anyone else. However, she was cautioned for being media shy; procrastinating on issues of concern ; overly cautious when it comes to expressing her views and opinion; and slow pace of licensing. Consequently, she rarely volunteers any advice and has been overshadowed by her juniors. Although she is supposed to be the one writing minutes of the Board, she has delegated this responsibility to her juniors. Lack of supervision has resulted in minutes being prepared late, resulting in admonition by the Board and Board Committees, with the Director General having to apologize on several occasions. As a result of her procrastination, she never made good her promise to become an Advocate after she had been appointed Secretary to the Board. To date, she is yet to present her petition in that regard. Regrettably, most of her juniors are now qualified advocates while she is not. It is recommended that renewal of her contract should be accompanied with a condition for her to become an advocate within six months from the date of contract renewal.
3.	Director of Petroleum	Cautioned on perceptions that he is not a team-player within the organizational structure, that he is possessive of the petroleum division and that he is selective on issues regarding licensing. Further cautioned that he is given to the application of double standards in dealing with cases of a similar nature. Has been known to sign off on matters that merit the Director General's attention in a manner that his peers/subordinates have construed as attempts to protect selected operators. Engages in back biting of colleagues and superiors. Generally in poor health that has been linked to irresponsible drinking habits that resulted in the Board giving him a stern warning in 2009. He claims to have stopped drinking but has had to be given special medical attention when he travelled abroad to Djibouti and Malawi in 2010. Generally intelligent but intolerant to opposing views. Tends to intimidate "non-confirming" juniors and is considered as arrogant by peers.
4.	Director of Electricity	He is a nice, gentle, religious person. Commended for being trustworthy, loyal and easy to work with. However, he is challenged in terms of oral communication skills and punctuates every other sentence with an "eer". Generally complacent and reacts to issues often raised by other staff who seem to be worried of inaction from his division. He has not handled well matters relating to the licensing of electricity contractors. As a result, no report is yet to be submitted to the Board with regard to this activity for the past two years. He managed a ‘flawed' process that improperly usurped the powers of the Board to issue licenses. Cautioned on the slow pace of turning benefits of international cooperation so that it is reflected in EWURA rules and regulation; lack of monitoring system and independent data in Directorate when compared with Petrol and Water Divisions; and on lack of innovation in Electricity Directorate, such that perceptions were that he tends to be satisfied with the status quo.
5.	Director of Regulatory Economics	Commended for his contribution to the organizational structure. Under his tenure, he assisted with setting up an information system, pricing template and verifying financial viability of applicants. He admitted lack of awareness in natural gas sector which he attributed to lack of reference data and given that the sector is still in its infancy stage.
6.	Director of Water and Sewerage	Commended for very good supervisory skills with respect to development of water sector and incremental approach to problem solving. Experience as an operator, good contacts with German development partners and previous background with ministry helped with development of the division. Under his tenure, the Authority has continued to take on more responsibility in the water sector. There has been increased engagement from the utility authorities which has lead to ever increasing acceptance of EWURA as a regulator by the utility authorities.
7.	Director of Corporate Affairs	Credited with consecutive good audit reports, improved staff welfare, loans and pension funds during his tenure.

Hapo kwenye red ndipo kulipo na tatizo la EWURA, na kwenye blue bado msiba mkubwa uliotufikisha hapa,Jamani Wana wa Tanzania tufike sehemu tukubaliane si kunyanyapana bali ndio hali halisi na ukweli kuwa tunafika sehemu kiutendaji tunaathiri na kuludisha nyuma sababu ya janga hili.Kwani watu wazima msione ili.Mkubali kuwa mwenzetu huyu ngoja hakae pembeni apewe kazi nyepesi nyepesi kama ni kumlea basi mlee kwenye mazingira yasiyo na tashiti na umuhimu mkubwa kwa Taifa kama hizi.

Wataalamu wanajua mbona awaseme juu ya tatizo hili.popote penye maamuzi ya ajabu na vituko vingi tataizo hili limekuwa likichangia sana japo si lahisi kufahamika na kueleweka kwa wengi.

Tufike sehemu tukubali tunatatizo na kama tatizo akiwa nalo mwenzetu mpeni desk mpeni kazi nyepesi mleeni kwa misingi hiyo,Lakini si kumpa sehemu nyeti na muhimu kwenye Taifa kama mtu ni mgonjwa.

Mpaka lini mambo haya.

 

[plawala]

Lakini watu wanashangaza; walipewa nafasi ya kuchagua 2010 wakaamua kuwarudisha; sasa kinachonishangaza kuwa hata watu waliowapigia kura nao wanaanza kujifanya wanashangaa kana kwamba hawakujua watakachokipata. Inashangaza.

Ni kweli MM

Lakini naamini watanzania kiasi cha kutosha hawakuichagua CCM mwaka jana,tatizo ni kwamba mifumo ya kuhesabu kura halali imeingiliwa na virusi vya aina zote kiasi kwamba kama hivi virusi hatutaviondoa kwa utaratibu tutakaokubaliana kwenye katiba mpya bado hawa jamaa watatuchezea sana.

 

[Mwl Solomon]

MKATABA WA KUENDELEZA PLOT NO. 24, BLOCK ‘AA’, MCHIKICHINI, DAR ES SALAAM, KWA NJIA YA UBIAMKATABA HUU WA UBIA UMEFANYIKA LEO

TAREHE¼¼¼¼¼¼ MWEZI¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼2011

BAINA YABARAZA LA WADHAMINI LA UMOJA WA VIJANA WA CHAMA CHA MAPINDUZINACAMEL OIL CAMPANY LIMITED.​

UMETAYARISHWA NA:
GLORIOUS LUOGA,
MWANASHERIA WA CCM,
MAKAO MAKUU YA CCM,
P.O.BOX 50,
DODOMA.

MKATABA WA KUENDELEZA PLOT NO. 24, BLOCK ‘AA’, MCHIKICHINI, DAR ES SALAAM, KWA NJIA YA UBIA​

MKATABA HUU WA UBIA UMEFANYIKA LEO

TAREHE ¼¼¼¼¼MWEZI¼¼¼¼MWAKA 2011.BAINA YA

​

BARAZA LA WADHAMINI LA UMOJA WA VIJANA WA CHAMA CHA MAPINDUZI, wa S.L.P 19989, DAR ES SALAAM ( ambao hapo baadaye pale panaporuhusu katika mkataba huu wataitwa “Mmiliki” neno ambalo litamaanisha pia yeyote atakayechukua nafasi yao) kwa upande mmoja,

NA​

CAMEL OIL CAMPANY LIMITED, ya S.L.P 22786, DAR ES SALAAM kampuni iliyosajiliwa chini ya sheria ya makampuni, sura 212, (ambayo hapo baadaye pale panaporuhusu katika mkataba huu itaitwa “Mbia”, neno ambalo litamaanisha pia Wafilisi wake au yeyote atakayechukua nafasi yake) kwa upande mwingine,

KWA KUWA Mmiliki ndiye mmiliki halali wa eneo lenye ukubwa wa mita za mraba 3,595 linalojulikana kama Plot No. 24, Block ‘AA’, eneo la Mchikichini, Dar es Salaam, ambalo Mmiliki analimiliki chini ya namba 41986( eneo ambalo hapo baadaye katika mkataba huu litaitwa “Kiwanja Kinachohusika” )



KWA KUWA Kamati ya Utekelezaji ya Umoja wa Vijana wa Chama Cha Mapinduzi Mkoa wa Dar es Salaam kwa niaba ya Baraza la Wadhamini wa Umoja wa Vijana wa Chama Cha Mapinduzi katika kikao chake kilichokutana tarehe 08/06/2008 pamoja na mambo mengine kilijadili barua ya maombi ya uwekezaji ya kampuni ya Camel Oil Campany Limited kwa njia ya ubia na Umoja wa Vijana wa CCM katika kuendeleza kiwanja kilichotajwa hapo juu.

KWA KUWA CAMEL OIL CAMPANY LIMITED, ya S.L.P 22786, Dar es Salaam, alithibitishwa na Baraza la Umoja wa Vijana wa CCM Mkoa wa Dar es Salaam kwa barua ya tarehe ¼¼¼¼¼¼. yenye kumbukumbu namba ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼ambayo nakala yake imeambatishwa katika mkataba huu.

KWA KUWA Mbia atawasilisha ramani na michoro kwenye Kamati ya Utekelezaji ya Umoja wa Vijana wa CCM, Mkoa wa Dar es Salaam ambayo inaendana na makubaliano yaliyo chini ya Mkataba huu.

NA KWA KUWA, Mbia atashirikiana na Mmiliki juu ya upatikanaji wa kibali cha ujenzi kutoka mamlaka zinazohusika.


HIVYO BASI MKATABA HUU NI USHUHUDA KUWA PANDE ZOTE ZIMEKUBALIANA KAMA IFUATAVYO:-

1. AINA YA MRADI:

Mkataba huu unahusu uendelezaji wa kiwanja kilichotajwa hapo juu kwa kubomoa jengo lililopo wakati wa kutengeneza mkataba huu na kujenga jengo jipya la kisasa lenye urefu wa ghorofa sita(6) kwa ajili ya Malazi/biashara na kituo cha mafuta kwa gharama ya Tsh3,064,300,000/= tu. Au kama kibali cha kujenga kituo cha mafuta kitakosekana kujenga majengo pacha mawili ya ghorofa sita(6)kila moja likiwa na apartments 12 kwa ajili ya makazi,hotel na ofisi kwa gharama ya Tsh. 3,054,460,000 tu.


2. MCHANGO WA MMILIKI:

Mchango wa Mmiliki kwenye mradi huu wa ubia utakuwa ni kama ifuatavyo:-

i. Kutoa Kiwanja chake kwa ajili ya mradi wa ubia.ii. Kumhamisha mpangaji aliyopo sasa katika jengo lililopo kwenye kiwanja kinachohusika wakati wa kutengeneza mkataba huu.iii. Kuomba kibali cha ujenzi kwa kushirikiana na Mbia.3.MCHANGO WA MBIA:


Mchango wa Mbia kwenye mradi huu utakuwa kama ifuatavyo:-


i. Kujenga kwenye kiwanja kinachohusika kwa gharama zake kama ilivyoelevya katika kifungu cha kwanza(1) hapo juu na kwa mijibu wa michoro itakayokubalika na pande zote na mamlaka husika.



ii. Mbia atatoa jumla ya Tsh. 78,000,000/= (Shilingi Milioni sabini na nane) kwa Umoja wa Vijana wa CCM Mkoa wa Dar es Salaam. Kati ya hizo 39,000,000/= (Milioni thelathini na tisa) utakuwa mchango wa Mmbia kwa Umoja huo na Tsh. 39,000,000/= nyingine atawakopesha Umoja wa Vijana wa CCM Mkoa wa Dar es Salaam kama sehemu ya kufanikisha kulipa madeni ambayo Umoja huo unadaiwa katika kumhamisha mpangaji aliyepo.

iii. Fedha ambazo Umoja wa Vijana wa CCM utakopeshwa na Mbia zitarejeshwa kwa Mbia kutoka kwenye mgao wa mapato ya Mmiliki baada ya ujenzi kukamilika kwa makubaliano ambayo Mbia na Mmiliki watakubaliana.

iv. Mbia atakuwa na majukumu yafuatayo:-


a) Kutayarisha mkataba wa ubia na kulipia gharama zake.
b) Kubomoa jengo lililopo kwenye kiwanja kinachohusika.
c) Kumteua Msanifu wa ujenzi (Architect) na kumlipa gharama zake.
d) Kumteua Mhandisi Mshauri wa Mradi na kumlipa gharama zake.
e) Kutayarisha michoro kwa gharama zake na kuiwasilisha kwenye kikao kati ya Mmiliki na Mbia kwa ajili a kuipitisha.
f) Kulipia gharama za kibali cha ujenzi.
g) Baada ya kukamilisha ujenzi atalisimamia kwa gharama zake katika masuala ya usafi, maji, upatikanaji wa nishati ya ziada kwa kupata umeme, ukarabati, ulinzi na huduma zingine za majengo.

4.MAJUKUMU YA PAMOJA:

Mmiliki na Mbia watashirikiana katika kufanikisha majukumu yafuatayo:-

i. Kupitisha michoro itakayochorwa na Msanifu wa Ujenzi (Architect).
ii. Kuomba na kufuatilia kibali cha ujenzi.5.MUDA WA KUMKABIDHI MBIA KIWANJA:

Mmiliki atamkabidhi Mbia kiwanja kinachohusika na mradi huu kikiwa wazi kwa ajili ya kumwezesha Mbia kubomoa jengo lililopo kwa sasa si zaidi ya miezi 3 kuanzia tarehe ya pande zote kutia saini mkataba huu, isipokuwa tu kama mmiliki atazuiwa kufanya hivyo kutokana na sababu zilizo nje ya uwezo wake kama vile amri ya Mahakama, n.k. Katika mazingira hayo Mmiliki atamkabidhi kiwanja kinacho husika kikiwa wazi kwa ajili ya kubomoa jengo lililopo kwa sasa mara tu baada ya kipingamizi cha aina hiyo kutoweka.

6.MUDA WA KUKAMILISHA UJENZI:

Mbia atakamilisha ujenzi wa jengo na kituo cha mafuta katika muda wa miezi 36 kuanzia tarehe ya kupata kibali cha ujenzi, labda ikiwa Mmiliki atakuwa amechelewa kumkabidhi Mbia Kiwanja kinachohusika kikiwa wazi kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu. Katika hali kama hiyo, muda ambao Mbia atakuwa anasubiri kukabidhiwa Kiwanja kinachohusika kikiwa wazi hautahesabiwa katika kupata hiyo miezi 36 ambayo ndani yake Mbia anatakiwa awe amekamilisha ujenzi.

7.MKATABA WA UPANGAJI

Mara baada ya ujenzi kukamilika mmiliki atampa mpangaji mkataba wa upangaji wa muda wa miaka 36 kwa masharti ambayo pande zote mbili zitaafikiana.

BILA YA KUATHIRI MATAKWA YA HAPO JUU

i. Mbia atalipa kodi ya kuanzia ya Tsh 7,500,000/= kwa mwezi .
ii. Kodi itaongezwa kila baada ya miaka mitatu kwa asilimia kumi(10%)
iii. Pande zote mbili zitaweza kukubaliana masharti mengine ya upangaji.
iv. Jengo litasimamiwa na mbia na mbia atakuwa na haki na wajibu wa kutafuta wateja wa kupanga katika jingo hilo kukusanya mapato na kulipa kodi ya mapato.
v. Mmiliki atawajibika na ulipaji wa kodi ya kiwanja

8.UTATUZI WA MIGOGORO:

Ikiwa kutatokea kutoelewana kwa aina yeyote ile baina ya Mmiliki na Mbia kuhusu jambo lolote linalohusu ubia ulioundwa chini ya Mkataba huu au linalohusu mkataba huu au fasili yake, basi katika hali hiyo pande zote zitatumia jitihada zake zote ili kumaliza kutoelewana huko kwa njia ya Muafaka na ikiwa njia hiyo itashindikana, basi pande zote zinakubaliana kushughulikia kutoelewana huko kwa njia ya usuluhishi chini ya sheria ya Usuluhishi (Arbitration Act, Cap. 15).
9. KUSITISHA MKATABA:

Ikiwa Mbia atashindwa kukamilisha mradi unaohusika katika muda uliokubalika na pande zote, basi Mmiliki anaweza kumpatia Mbia taarifa (notice) ya siku 60, ya kurekebisha ucheleweshaji huo. Ikiwa Mbia atashindwa kurekebisha ucheleweshaji huo baada ya kupewa “notice”, basi Mmiliki anaweza kukatisha mkataba huu na ikiwa itatokea hivyo Mbia atakuwa na haki ya kurejeshewa pesa alizotumia katika ujenzi

unaohusika kwa kiasi ambacho pande zote zitaafikiana na ikiwa pande zote hazitaafikiana kuhusu kiasi cha pesa alizotumia Mbia, basi Mthamini Mkuu wa Serikali (Chief Government Valuer) atafanya tathimini ya gharama alizotumia Mbia. Ikiwa itaonekana kuwa Mmiliki amepata hasara kutokana na ucheleweshaji wa Mbia, basi Mbia atalipa fidia kwa Mmiliki kwa kiwango kitakacholingana na hasara atakayokuwa amepata Mmiliki.10. WAWAKILISHI WA WAHUSIKA:

Pande zote zimekubaliana kuwa mwakilishi halali wa Mmiliki kwa ajili ya Mkataba huu ni Katibu wa Umoja wa Vijana wa Chama Cha Mapinduzi, Mkoa wa Dar es Salaam, ambaye anuani yake ni S.L.P 21598, Dar es Salaam. Mwakilishi halali wa Mbia kwa ajili ya Mkataba huu ni Mkurugenzi Mtendaji, Camel Oil Campany Ltd., S.L.P 22786, Dar es Salaam.
11. FIDIA YA KODI KWA MMILIKI WAKATI WA UJENZI:

Kwa kuwa Mmiliki alikuwa anayatumia majengo yaliyokuwepo katika kiwanja husika kwa kupangisha na kulipwa kodi, Mbia amekubali kumlipa kodi ya shilingi Tsh 1,300,000/= (milioni moja laki tatu) kwa mwezi katika kipindi chote cha miezi 36 ya ujenzi.

12.VIAMBATANISHO:


Pande zote zinakubaliana kuwa nyaraka zifuatazo zitaambatabishwa kwenye Mkataba huu na kusomeka kama sehemu ya Mkataba huu:(a)Michoro ya ujenzi iliyoidhinishwa na kikao cha pamoja kati ya Mmiliki na Mbia.
(b)Vibali vya ujenzi

KAMA USHUHUDA WA MKATABA HUU PANDE ZOTE ZIMEWEKA LAKIRI ZAKE KWA NAMNA NA KATIKA TAREHE NA MWAKA KAMA ILIVYOONYESHWA HAPA CHINI.
UMETIWA LAKIRI YA BARAZALA WADHAMINI WA UMOJAWA VIJANA WA CCM na kutolewaHapa Dar es Salaam

mbele yetu leo ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼.. ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼.Tarehe ¼¼¼. Mwezi ¼¼. Mwaka2011Jina:¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼Sahihi: ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼..¼¼¼¼.Anuani ya Posta: ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼..¼¼¼.¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼.Wadhifa: ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼..Jina:¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼Sahihi: ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼..¼¼¼¼.Anuani ya Posta: ¼¼¼¼..¼¼¼¼¼¼.¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼.Wadhifa: ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼.¼¼¼¼¼..

UMETIWA SAINI NA CAMEL OIL COMPANY LTD. na kutolewa

Hapa Dar es Salaam mbele yetu leo ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼.... Tarehe ¼¼¼. Mwezi ¼¼. Mwaka2011Jina:¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼Sahihi: ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼..¼¼¼¼.Anuani ya Posta: ¼¼¼.¼¼.¼¼¼¼¼. ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼.Wadhifa: ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼..Jina:¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼Sahihi: ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼..¼¼¼¼.Anuani ya Posta: ¼¼¼¼¼¼..¼¼¼¼.¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼.Wadhifa: ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼..

Jamani signed agreement iko wapi?

 

[Mpaka Kieleweke]

Haya bana , hizi kumbe sio siri tena na sasa zipo hadharani mchana kweupe peee.........

 

[BONGOLALA]

Jengo umoja wa wanawake ccm pale moroko-MANJI,Jengo umoja wa vijana lumumba-SUBASH PATEL aliyemjengea hekalu bure jk pale msoga

 

[wimbi la mbele]

Petrol station pembeni ya apartments?

tukisema kuwa hata hao watu wa environmental impact assessment wamekula rushwa mtakataa?