PESHAWAR, July 24: A two-member bench of the Peshawar High Court on Wednesday summoned the Peshawar District Nazim and Director-general of City Development and Municipal Department (CDMD) in a contempt of court case.

The bench, comprising Chief Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan and Justice Ijaz Afzal, fixed Aug 15 for the next hearing of the case and directed District Nazim Azam Afridi, CDMD Director-General Malik Saad and chief officer of the defunct Peshawar Municipal Corporation Alam Sher to appear before the court on the said date.

The petition was filed by Malik Fida and 12 other citizens, stating that the respondents had been violating an order of the high court. The petitioners claimed that they had filed a writ petition in the high court in 1997 against non-allotment of cabins to them by the Peshawar Municipal Corporation.

The petitioners claimed that the PMC’s administration had received Rs25,000 from each petitioner, but it was not allotting cabins to them near Faqirabad Railway passing. The high court had accepted their petition on Nov 27, 2000, and directed the PMC’s administration to demarcate drawing and design of the shops within two months so that the petitioners could be able to set up shops on the land demarcated for that purpose. However, till now the petitioners were not allotted any place or cabins in accordance with the order of the high court.

Barrister Masood Kausar appeared for the petitioners and stated that the respondents should be summoned in person. He stated that initially, the administrator and chief officer of the PMC were made respondents in the contempt of court petition, but now the PMC was defunct and instead CDMD had been looking after the affairs of the city. He added that now neither the District Nazim nor the CDMD had been assuming responsibility of allotting space and cabins to the petitioners.

In one of the previous hearings Malik Saad appeared before the court and stated that after the introduction of the new local government system the district and town councils were responsible for the municipal and development functions.

The respondents have also claimed that the push-cart owners had occupied the place where allotment had to be made to the petitioners for construction of the cabins.

They added that getting that place vacated from push-cart owners might create law and order situation for the government.