KARACHI: Dispute over plot in Lyari Town: UC Nazim booked
By Our Staff Reporter
KARACHI, Dec 24: Another row kicked off over a precious land situated in Lyari Town, involving a highly influential person in the city claiming the ownership.
A union council Nazim and a councillor in Lyari Town were booked on charge of occupying a precious plot in the Chawkiwara police area.
The FIR No 225\2001 was filed by one Mohammad Amin Lakhani, son of Mohammad Khan Siddiq, claiming the ownership of Plot no AK-20A-35-85 against Nazim Habib Hasan of UC-9 Singoo Lane and councillor Ramzan Lasi.
The multi-million rupees plot measuring more than 500 square yards is situated near Madina Masjid Road, Saeedabad, in Lyari. After the Punjab Press land affair, it is the second scam in the area.
The office of Lyari Town took a serious notice of the action of the SSP in a letter sent to the city government Nazim and the IG Police.
It said the action was taken without ascertaining facts, on a concocted grounds, According to the communication, the plot is situated on the defunct KMC and is not leased out to any person, while the status of the demolished structure was encroachment.
It said the courts had dismissed the claims of two private concerns, namely Mist Aisha Bai wife of Haji Yusuf, claiming titlement of plot no AK-35-85A filed in a suit bearing no 151\96 against the defunct KMC in 1996.
Another party named Haji Habib claiming the titlement of plot no AK-20A-35-85 also filed a suit bearing 157/96 against the defunct KMC. The suit was dismissed on 7-11-2001.
It was stated in the communication that the demolition action was taken in 1996 departmentally by the defunct KMC and it had nothing to do with the present elected representatives of the town and they had played no role in the whole case.
It further said the police action was mala fide and was taken without ascertaining facts from the land department. It also added that the area councillor had come forward to save an amenity plot for public interest by constructing a wall and the action was duly recorded.
A letter signed by the deputy legal advisor CDGK declared the private owner as an encroacher and categorically stated that the plot was an amenity plot.
According to the approved layout plan the plot is reserved for school purposes and the defunct KMC also stated that the demolition action was taken on 14-20-1996 in accordance with the notice under act 1975 issued on 25-6-96.
