KARACHI, Nov 18: The Supreme Court has taken exception to the Sindh High Court ‘embarking upon inquiry into controversial facts’ in exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction.
The observation came on a petition for leave to appeal moved by a Lea Market ice factory owner, who approached the SHC against the Karachi Building Control Authority’s decision to seal his commercial premises in a residential area.
A high court division bench had the site inspected by the court nazir before dismissing the petition and directing the KBCA to act in accordance with the law. The petitioner went to the Supreme Court to seek leave to appeal and dismissing it, an SC bench, comprising Justices Rana Bhagwandas and Hamid Ali Mirza, remarked that ‘this was not a proper case for entertainment in constitutional jurisdiction of the high court as the matter involved a roving and elaborate factual enquiry into disputed questions of fact raised by the petitioner and controverted by the respondents’.
In an order approved for reporting in the Pakistan Law Decisions, the bench remarked that ‘it was not the function of the high court to appoint a commissioner for inspection of the site for determination of fact on the ground’. The writ petition was ‘totally ill-advised and completely misconceived’, the order said. It added: “Indeed, this court is not expected to embark upon enquiry into controversial facts of a case and record its findings in the exercise of extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction, which is only meant for resolving and interpreting pure questions of law. It observed that the high court should not have appointed its nazir as commissioner nor made unnecessary remarks with regard to regularization of the building in question by the KBCA as all public functionaries were obliged to act strictly in accordance with the law.”
APPEAL ADMITTED: A bench of the SC comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry and Justice Saiyed Saeed Ashhad admitted an appeal moved by the KBCA against an SHC order for approval of plan of a commercial complex to be constructed on four plots which had not been declared commercial.
The KBCA’s additional controller, Shahid Jamil Khan, submitted that the plots could not be amalgamated under the law and that the proposed commercial complex would create problems for residents of the area. An SHC division bench said the plea had been taken belatedly and asked the KBCA to sanction the plan.
In its petition for leave to appeal, the KBCA said it was never too late to rectify a mistake of law and efflux of time could not validate an illegality. Only one of the plots faced Sharea Faisal while others were situated on different roads and lanes that had not been commercialised. The SC bench ordered that the appeal be heard promptly after four weeks.
