KARACHI: KBCA probing merger of plots, High Court told
By Our Staff Reporter
KARACHI, Sept 19: The Karachi Building Control Authority has instituted an inquiry into the merger of plots facing different roads in violation of the Karachi Building and Town Planning Regulations, the Sindh High Court was informed on Tuesday.
A high court division bench comprising Justices Sarmad Jalal Osmany and Ali Sain Dino Metlo was hearing a contempt application moved by the owner-developer of a big plot formed by amalgamation of four plots facing Sharea Faisal, Tipu Sultan Road and another road.
The petitioner said the bench had allowed his plea that since the area in which the plot was situated had been commercialized, he should be allowed to build a high-rise commercial complex without further permission from or payment to the city district government.
The KBCA, the owner-developer said, was directed to approve his construction design without seeking or waiting for a no-objection certificate from the city district government but it had not been complied with.
The KBCA submitted through its counsel, Shahid Jamil Khan, that the plan submitted by the petitioner was being processed. Besides technical objections, the biggest hurdle in its approval was that the plot consisted of four independent residential plots situated on different roads.
The amalgamation was totally repugnant to the Karachi Building and Town Planning Regulations. It would impinge on the rights of the neighbouring owners and residents. The KBCA has instituted an inquiry into all such unlawful mergers to punish the culprits and cancel sanctions, if any.
Asked by the bench how the KBCA could undo its decision after a lapse of so many years, the counsel said a bona fide legal mistake could be rectified at any stage. It was never too late to undo an illegality, particularly when it was in the public interest. The KBCA would proceed against all its officials found involved in unlawful sanctions, he claimed.
Appearing for the respondent city district government, Advocate Manzoor Ahmed submitted that the building, if constructed as proposed, would wreak havoc on environment and amenities in the area.
The complex involved a total covered area of 199,608 square feet on 10 floors, besides upper and lower basements. The area was already too congested to be burdened with another high-rise. The city district government and the public utilities would be hard put to provide facilities to the owners of shops in the complex. The CDGK, the counsel said, was already short of funds to finance its projects.
The hearing was adjourned to Thursday.
schoolteacher’S CASE: A division bench of the Sindh High Court restrained the education department from taking action against a petitioner schoolteacher under an impugned show-cause notice.
Petitioner Liaqat Ali Ghangro complained through Advocate Rasheed A. Razvi that he was sent on forced leave for participating in his association’s meeting on Aug 23. On Aug 28, he was issued a show-cause notice for dismissal from service.
He said he could not be proceeded against under Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance. He had already been punished by being sent on forced leave without an inquiry and a show-cause notice could not be issued subsequently.
A division bench comprising Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali and Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery suspended the show-cause notice and restrained the respondent department from taking any action under it. The petition was adjourned to Sept 28 for further hearing.
Justice Mohammad Moosa K. Leghari, meanwhile, allowed three revision petitions moved by three trade union office-bearers through Advocate M.A.Khan Azmati and directed Labour Court V of Karachi to hear their grievance petition and complaint simultaneously. Both the civil and criminal cases shall be heard expeditiously and decided at the earliest possible, he asked the labour court.
Petitioners Irfan Husain Khan, Muhammad Mustafa and Mazhar Ali, office-bearers of the collective bargaining agent for the employees of M/s United Liner Agencies, Karachi, moved a grievance petition after failure of bilateral negotiations and conciliation proceedings initiated by them under the Industrial Relations Ordinance.
While the labour court was proceeding with the matter, they were dismissed from service in violation of the provisions of the IRO.
They filed a criminal complaint. The employer concern challenged parallel proceedings. Favouring the employer’s view, the labour court suspended criminal proceedings. The high court reversed the labour court order and asked it try and decide both matters promptly.
