KARACHI: SC admits six appeals to interpret building control law
By Shujaat Ali Khan
KARACHI, Feb 22: The Supreme Court has admitted six appeals, including two by the Karachi Building Control Authority and one by the Association of Builders and Developers (Abad), to interpret the Sindh Regulation and Control (Use of Plots and Construction of Buildings) Ordinance, 2002.
The ordinance was promulgated on March 19, 2002, to provide for regularization of violative buildings subject to certain conditions and payment of hefty fines. It was to remain in force for one year during which the entire regularization process was to be completed.
The ordinance was challenged in the high court by the Citizens for a Better Environment and members of the KBCA oversee committee appointed in 1999 under the Sindh Building Control Ordinance, 1979, to ensure compliance with the building rules and regulations.
The petitioners said the ordinance was promulgated to override judicial orders and the objections raised to the construction of a number of buildings by the committee. The committee members requested the court to declare the ordinance as being repugnant to the Constitution and sought their restoration.
By an order made on Oct 14, 2003, a Sindh High Court division bench, comprising Justices Sabihuddin Ahmed and S. Ali Aslam Jaferi, held that the ordinance was not violative of Articles 9, 14 and 25 of the Constitution as alleged nor did it affect the concept of the independence of the judiciary.
As for the scope of the ordinance, the bench declared that the word ‘constructed’ used in its main Section applied only to buildings ‘completed in all respects’ on the date of commencement, that is, Feb 19, 2002. Any regularization accorded in violation of the law, including the provisions of the impugned ordinance, can always be questioned under the SBCO or in writ jurisdiction, it observed.
Refusing to restore the oversee committee members because their three-year tenure had expired, the bench asked the provincial government to constitute a new committee as required by the SBCO.
‘Completion of buildings in all respects’ on the commencing day as a condition precedent to qualify for regularization piqued a number of builders and developers whose cases were pending before the KBCA for regularization. Over 4,000 buildings are said to have been affected by the contemplation. Abad, Fortune Towers and the KBCA approached the Supreme Court for leave to challenge the SHC judgment.
The petitions came up before an SC bench, comprising Justices Saiyed Saeed Ashhad and Nasirul Mulk, at Islamabad on Tuesday. It admitted all seven petitions to decide whether the word ‘constructed’ occurring in the 2002 ordinance could be interpreted to mean ‘completed in all respects’. The appeals were directed to be fixed in April. In the meantime, status quo would be maintained in respect of the buildings awaiting regularization. The builders were asked to refrain from further construction and the KBCA from demolition.
Advocates Abdul Hafeez Pirzada and Abid Zuberi appeared for the petitioners, Additional Advocate-General Qazi Khalid Ali and Advocate Shahid Jamil Khan for the provincial government and the KBCA and Advocates Naeemul Rehman and Khurshid for the respondent NGO and committee members.
GUL PLAZA: A Sindh High Court division bench, meanwhile, asked the provincial anti-corruption establishment to furnish attested copies of the documents pertaining to Gul Plaza, Preedy Street, M A Jinnah Road, to the KBCA to enable it file a counter-affidavit in a petition moved by the plaza owner.
The KBCA had issued the owner a notice for selling shops in the violative plaza without a no-objection certificate from the authority. The owner assailed the notice and the court summoned the KBCA.
Appearing for the authority, KBCA counsel Shahid Jamil Khan submitted that the anti-corruption establishment had seized and taken away a large number of original files during it raid without preparing a list. The KBCA had no idea how many files had been taken away by the establishment. It did not have copies of its own record. The documents relating to Gul Plaza were among the papers seized by the establishment and the KBCA could not possibly file a counter-affidavit in the absence of record.
The bench, which consisted of Justices Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery and Maqbool Baqar, asked the establishment to furnish copies of the relevant documents to the KBCA and adjourned further hearing.
