KARACHI, July 9: Justice Amir Hani Muslim of the Sindh High Court asked the advocate-general on Friday to explain on July 21 the authority of law under which the city district government let out outdoor advertizing sites
on city roads, footpaths, pavements and private buildings.
He was hearing a contempt application moved by an outdoor advertizer through Advocate Saathi M. Ishaque against the removal of hoardings installed by him. The applicant claimed that the high court had restrained the city government from dismantling the bill-boards by an order passed on July 29, 2003.
He said he was a licensed outdoor advertizer and could not be deprived of the publicity sites, which the city government has now decided to lease out by public auction.
The city government counsel, Manzoor Ahmed, had no satisfactory answer when the judge inquired about the law that vested the ownership of the roads and pavements in the CDGK.
The law only required the city government to look after the roads and pavements and keep them in a state of good repair. Advertisement sites were not open to sale by the city government, particularly when they obstructed and distracted smooth flow of traffic, the judge observed.
Justice Muslim also said that bill-boards were in some cases too large to allow an adequate view of the vehicles and other objects moving from different directions at large intersections.
The city squares were too congested to allow free and smooth movement of vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians. The size of the hoardings should be specified and the specifications should be strictly adhered to. The hearing was adjourned to July 21 for an exposition of law by the advocate-general.
Justice Sabihuddin Ahmed, meanwhile, continued hearing of a suit instituted against the city government by the Outdoor Advertizers Welfare Association and some of its members through Advocate Khwaja Naveed Ahmed.
The hearing was adjourned to July 13 for arguments on the question of entitlement of the former licencees whose licences have expired. The interim order applicable to the auction of publicity sites earlier leased out to the plaintiffs was extended to the next date.
CDGK counsel Manzoor Ahmed submitted that the publicity sites' lease was regulated by the Advertizing and Signage Bylaws notified by the CDGK in 2003 in the official gazette.
According to Bylaw 4.5, the sites in zone 'A' could only be disposed of by public auction. The licences granted by the city government or its predecessor (KMC) were meant for a specified period and the previous licencees had no vested right on the expiry of their licences.
Public auction of the sites encouraged open competition and transparency and also generated more revenue for the city government, the counsel submitted. The plaintiffs' counsel argued that a number of bylaws were ultra vires and should be declared void by the court.
The schedule of rates notified in March 2004 was also invalid. The bylaws, the counsel contended, were not applicable to the licencees who had their licences renewed from year to year on payment of the prescribed charges.
Justice Ahmed asked the plaintiffs to pay the court fee individually as directed earlier on Friday. They were also asked to deposit security with the SHC nazir by the next date. The plaintiffs who fail to pay the fee and security would be non- suited.
