KARACHI, Oct 14: The Sindh High Court upheld on Tuesday the validity of the Sindh Regulation and Control (Use of Plots and Construction of Buildings) Ordinance, 2002.

The ordinance, promulgated on March 15, 2002, envisaged that “notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force or judgment, decree or order of any court, any building constructed before the commencement of this ordinance in violation of the provisions of the Sindh Building Control Ordinance, 1979, 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”. It was to remain in force for one year.

The ordinance was challenged as being repugnant to Articles 9 (security of person), 14 (inviolability of dignity of man) and 25 (equality of citizens) of the Constitution and violative of the independence of judiciary. The petition was moved by a number of organizations and individuals, including Shehri and Helpline Trust and members of the defunct KBCA oversee committee.

Barristers Naeemur Rehman and Qazi Faez Isa appeared for the petitioners and Advocate-General Mansoor Anwar Khan and Advocates Manzoor Ahmed, Shahid Jamil Khan and Abid Zuberi for the respondent Sindh government, the city government, the Karachi Building Control Authority and the Association of Builders and Developers.

Disposing of the petition, a division bench, comprising Justices Sabihuddin Ahmed and S. Ali Aslam Jafri, asked the Sindh government to constitute an oversee committee as provided by Section 4-B of the Sindh Building Control Ordinance or state reasons for not doing so within a month and made the following declarations:

1. The controversy does not become academic merely because the impugned ordinance has ceased to have operation. It purported to create rights of permanent nature.

2. Mala fides of the petitioners have not been established nor is the petition liable to be dismissed on grounds of locus standi of the petitioners.

3. The impugned ordinance is not violative of Articles 9, 14 and 25 of the constitution, nor does it affect the concept of the independence of judiciary.

4. The impugned ordinance is accordingly a valid piece of legislation subject to the clarification that apart from the categories spelt out in the proviso to its Section 5, the word “construction” used in the main section applies only to buildings completed in all respects on the date of its commencement.

5. Any regularization accorded in violation of the law, including the provisions of the impugned ordinance, can always be questioned in an appeal under the Sindh Building Control Ordinance or before this court by way of judicial review.

6. The members of the oversee committee are not entitled to seek restoration of their offices after the expiry of three years from the date of their appointment. However, the provincial government should either reconstitute a committee under Section 4-B of the Sindh Building Control Ordinance or assign proper reasons for not doing so within a month from Oct 14.

REMAND EXTENDED: Justice Shabbir Ahmed, administrative judge of Anti-Terrorism Courts, on Tuesday extended police remand of accused Asad Ali Shah till Oct 18, in prisoner van attack case, adds PPI.