KARACHI, June 8: The Karachi Building Control Authority (KBCA) has received 956 applications for regularization of various buildings in the city, but a negligible number of them is of professional builders.

The KBCA has spelt out this in the written parawise comments it has filed with the Sindh High Court while denying contentions of the petitioners who have challenged the Sindh Regulation and Control (use of plots and construction of buildings) Ordinance of 2002.

Among the 12 petitioners are Ardeshir Cowasjee, Qazi Faez Issa, Shehri and others. The respondents are the provincial government, KBCA and city district government, Karachi.

It is the case of the petitioners that the impugned Ordinance is violative of article 9 of the constitution since it is tantamount to depriving the citizens of their life, safety and well-being by permitting “regularization” of buildings which have been built in violation of law.

But the KBCA maintains that the Ordinance has been promulgated in public interest. The preamble of the said Ordinance provides for regulation and control of the use of plots and construction of buildings in the province of Sindh.

The said Ordinance came in force on March 15, 2002, and shall remain in force for one year from the date of its commencement.

It is the contention of the KBCA that the Ordinance is special law. Its section 3 provides that its provisions shall have effect notwithstanding any thing contained in any law for the time being in force.

Section 5 of the said Ordinance provides that notwithstanding any thing contained in any law for the time being in judgment, order or decree of any court, any building constructed before the commencement of said Ordinance, in violation of the provisions of the Ordinance or regulations made thereunder, may be regularized by the authority appointed under the Ordinance on the conditions and on payment of fees as may be prescribed.

On the contrary the petitioners have maintained that the impugned Ordinance does not give any reason why it has been promulgated.

It was promulgated when the governor of Sindh has admittedly been performing functions pursuant to the Provisional Constitution Order No 1 of 1999 and the Provisional Constitution (Amendment) Order No IX of 1999.

It is, therefore, clear that the PCO No 1 of 1999 specifically prohibits the interference with the functions of the courts as well as specifically stipulates that fundamental rights continue to be in force, the petitioners maintain.

It is their contention that acting at a time when the Sindh Assembly was dissolved, it was incumbent upon the respondent No 1 to consult the Oversee Committee of the respondent No 2, which was the only established and specialized statutory body well versed in all matters pertaining to buildings and laws and regulations pertaining thereto.

Not only the provincial government failed to consult this statutory body but acted in total contravention of its recommendations not to entertain any purported regularization of illegal buildings.

The petitioners maintain that the respondent No 1 is not accountable or responsible to anyone. In promulgating the impugned Ordinance it is advocating the destruction of civil society and the rule of law. It is submitted that the respondent No 1 has no right to barter away the rights and benefits of citizens for the aggrandizement of alleged corrupt builders and their accomplices, the “corrupt” members of the respondent No 2 and the KDA.

The impugned Ordinance abrogates to itself the powers and functions of the courts and tramples upon the judgments of this Court as well as of the Supreme Court.

It is their contention that such blatant exercise of purported legislative power to protect and advance the interest of the corrupt has never before been exercised in the legislative history of Pakistan.

The petitioners allege that the respondent No 2 and “corrupt” builders are now being pampered while the unfortunate law-abiding citizens are needed to pay for and suffer the consequences of the impugned Ordinance.

It is their case that the impugned Ordinance is ultra vires of the constitution and as such void ab initio and of no legal effect.

Promulgation of the impugned ordinance is beyond the powers vested in the governor and as such is a nullity in law and of no legal effect. The governor can only use his law-making powers as specifically specified, which do not permit him to promulgate laws which have the effect of spreading and or institutionalizing corruption, as is sought to be done by the impugned Ordinance and in particular section 5 thereof.

It is also considered violative of article 9 of the constitution since it is tantamount to depriving the citizens of their life, safety and well-being by permitting regularization of buildings which have been built in violation of law.

They have maintained that in promulgating the impugned Ordinance the respondents are promoting a culture of lawlessness and rewarding criminals. There no longer remains any inducement to follow the law because criminals will be encouraged to raise further illegal construction with legitimate expectancy that these criminal acts will also be subsequently regularized.

It is their contention that Karachi is situated in a region designated as one of upper-moderate seismic activity and could be subject to tremors in the magnitude region of upto “6” on the scale for recording of earthquakes. The respondent No 1, through the impugned Ordinance, purports to sanction buildings which have been constructed without having regard for such potential seismic activity and thereby exposing citizens to real and acute danger. Such scant regard for public safety borders on criminal neglect.

The petitioners have also cited constitutional provisions regarding well- being of the people.

They maintain that the impugned notification is to facilitate corruption and the breaking of the building laws, since there would remain no further check on the working of the respondent No 2 and floodgates to let in corruption would be opened.

The KBCA has, on the contrary, maintained that the petitioners intend to create unnecessary hurdles and obstacles in the way of their (KBCA) smooth functioning.