November 28, 2008	Friday	Ziqa'ad 29, 1429

KARACHI, Nov 27: The Sindh High Court directed the provincial home department on Thursday to deposit the compensation awarded to a petitioner for illegal detention in 2005 with its nazir by Dec 2.

If the department fails to comply, the home secretary should appear to make an explanation, a division bench consisting of Justices Khilji Arif Hussain and Dr Qamaruddin Bohra told Additional Advocate-General Masood A. Noorani, who earlier informed it that the necessary sanction had been obtained for payment of Rs185,000 as compensation to petitioner Gulzar Ahmed as directed. The petitioner’s counsel, Nehal Hashmi, said a deadline should be set for the payment.

The petitioner was unlawfully confined by the Steel Town police and subsequently involved in the killing of two brothers of his wife. His wife sued for dissolution of marriage and his house was sold. He also lost his job in the Pakistan Steel. He was acquitted and released by the trial court and he approached the high court for illegal detention, malicious prosecution and reinstatement. The PSM management reinstated him, and his wife rejoined him. The court ordered home department to pay him compensation amounting to Rs185,000 for illegal confinement for 37 days. He moved the high court again when the respondent department failed to make any payment.

Security from suspects

Another bench comprising Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali and Justice Ghulam Dastagir A. Shahani, meanwhile, asked the department to consider and decide the representations made by five petitioners against the police demand to execute Rs10 million bonds each as security for good behaviour.

The bench pointed out that the relevant home department notification under which the police stations concerned had issued the direction for enhancing the amount of security required the police to obtain bonds for three years. The period had since expired. Besides, the police notices did not mention the grounds for seeking security. The representations made by the petitioners were pending with the respondent department and no order had been passed on them. The bench asked Assistant Advocate-General Adnan Karim Memon to bring the matter to the notice of the department and appear on Dec 5, the next date of hearing, with fresh instructions.

The AAG earlier said the suspects had been required to execute the bonds for their links with outlawed militant outfits under sections 11-E and 11-EE of the Anti-Terrorism Act. They were involved in many cases and had also been confined under the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance. The notices had been issued in the interest of public security, he argued.

The petitioners, Imran Jamshed, Syed Amir Raza, Abu Bakar, Nausheen Kanwal and Affan Leghari have challenged the police notices and the ATA provision for being repugnant to their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution through Advocates Maqboolur Rehman and Syed Abdul Waheed.

Fee stayed

The bench consisting of Justices K.A. Hussain and Dr Bohra stayed the recovery of “marking fee” from a cement manufacturing concern till Dec 19, the next date of hearing of its petition.

Advocate Abid Husain submitted on behalf of the petitioner concern that marking fee was being recovered by the city district government in a haphazard manner. There was no uniform rate and different manufacturers were being charged at different rates. The petitioner was willing to pay the fee but it should be assessed in a uniform policy framework.

CAA wage policy

The bench disposed of a petition moved a former president of the union of Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) employees with the direction that the CAA should follow a uniform policy in respect of its employees’ remunerations.

Petitioner Zaheeruddin had submitted through Advocate Gohar Iqbal that the authority was discriminating against its low-grade employees while the higher officials were being rewarded with salary-raise disproportionately. It had prescribed one formula for employees from grade 1 to 6 and another for officers serving in grades 7 to 11, he contended.

Oil and gas prices

The bench comprising the CJ and Justice Shahani issued fresh notices to the federal petroleum ministry and the Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority (Ogra) in a petition moved by Advocate Shaukat Ali Shaikh due to non-service of earlier notices.

To the suggestion that the new reduced prices of oil and gas had partially remedied his grievance, the petitioner-lawyer submitted that the prices had not been cut in proportion to their decrease in the international market. The prices were still high. Besides, there had been no corresponding decrease in the air, rail and road fares.

The bench issued fresh notices for Dec 18.