KARACHI: KBCA rejects objection to construction on consulate
By Our Staff Reporter
KARACHI, March 30: The Karachi Building Control Authority refuted on Tuesday a plaintiff's allegation that the Japanese consulate-general was constructing its building on Frere Road in violation of the approved plan.
KBCA counsel Shahid Jamil Khan said the necessary permission and no-objection certificate had also been granted by the city district government. Representing the consulate-general, Barrister Jamil Chaudhry took the preliminary objection that under Section 86-A of the civil procedure code, 'no proceedings in any court shall lie against a diplomatic agent regarding an immovable property situated in Pakistan held on behalf of the sending state for the purpose of housing its mission.'
The contention was supported by the KBCA counsel and Justice Mushir Alam, who is seized of the suit instituted by M/s Chaman Investment, adjourned further hearing till April 21 for arguments on its maintainability. In the meanwhile, the parties were allowed to file their counter-affidavits to controvert the KBCA assertions.
The plaintiffs, who have their offices on the adjoining premises, submitted through Advocate Faisal Kamal Alam that the consulate building was being raised in violation of the law and rules. The building contractors claimed diplomatic immunity even from showing their construction plan. They said the building would hinder access to their office.
SUSPENSION PERIOD: An employee's salary cannot be withheld during the period of his suspension, the Sindh High Court declared on Tuesday. The ruling, by a division bench comprising Justices Shabbir Ahmed and Khilji Arif Hussain, came on a writ petition moved by Zahoor Ahmed Solangi, accounts officer in the Sindh Industrial and Trading Estate Limited.
The petitioner submitted through Advocate M. Nawaz Shaikh that he was placed under suspension in November 1999 following the registration of a corruption and fraud case against him by the anti-corruption establishment. He was released on bail by the anti-corruption court in August 2001. He joined his duty after his release on bail.
However, his employers refused to pay him past or present remunerations and also extended his suspension period from time to time. He alleged that he had been involved in a bogus case.
Holding that dues could not be withheld during suspension, the bench directed the Site managing director to release the petitioner's salary with retrospective effect from November 1999 to date.
