0
KARACHI, Sept 5: A division bench of the Sindh High Court issued contempt notices to three army officers, one civil servant and a police official for forcibly evicting a tenant of residential property owned by the ministry of defence in violation of a court order.
A contempt application was filed by Herbert Fernandes through Advocate Faisal Kamal Alam in 1999 and finally came up before a division bench, comprising Justices Mushir Alam and Mohammad Afzal Soomro, on Tuesday.
He submitted that he lived in part of a bungalow E.I. Lines, Saddar, leased out to a Parsi couple. After the death of the lessees he requested the government to sell the property to him on preferential basis.
In its order passed in 1999, the court ordered that the tenant would not be dispossessed except by due process of law and that no third party interest would be created in the property.
According to the tenant, two lieutenant colonels, a major, the then sub-divisional magistrate of Saddar and the SHO of the Saddar police station arrived on September 1, 1999, and put him and members of his family along with all their belongings and luggage in a truck and threw them near Baqai Hospital on Superhighway.
The bench issued notices to Lt-Col Arshad Abbasi, Lt-Col Tamim, Maj Shahbaz Malik (all posted at the station headquarters in 1999), the then SDM Agha Pervez and SHO Raisul Ghani for a date in office for framing of charge.
KESC CASE: Another division bench, comprising Justices Anwar Zaheer Jamali and Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery, adjourned the hearing of the Karachi Electricity Supply Corporation Labour Union petition against the corporation’s privatization to Sept 14 for arguments on an application moved by the petitioner for production of the record pertaining to privatization of KESC.
Advocate Rasheed A. Razvi argued on behalf of the petitioner that all documents relating to privatization were placed before the Supreme Court in the Pakistan Steel Mills case.
The respondents were, however, avoiding undertaking a similar exercise in respect of the petition against the KESC’s privatization in the Sindh High Court. He requested the bench to direct the respondents to place the minutes of the meetings of the Council of Common Interests, Cabinet Committee of Privatization and the Privatization Commission held to discuss the sale of the KESC.
Eaelier, Advocate Abdus Sattar Pirzada submitted that the KESC privatization had been endorsed by the CCI and the petition was liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.
The bench issued Deputy Attorney-General Akhtar Ali Mahmud a notice in the application for production of documents for Sept 14.
PROMOTION CASE: A division bench, comprising Chief Justice Sabihuddin Ahmed and Justice Yasmeen Abbasy, issued a notice to the establishment division for Sept 19 in a petition by a customs officer against his supersession. Javed Kazi submitted through Advocate Mansoorul Haq Solangi that he joined the customs in 1977 after passing the Central Superior Services Examination.
He was promoted to Grade 20 in 1997 and was given three cash awards by the president in 1992, 1998 and 1999 for his dedicated service.
However, he was ignored for promotion to Grade-21 and officers junior to him were promoted by the central selection board and the establishment division.
The bench also dismissed a lawyer’s petition against the appointment of the incumbent and former deputy prosecutor-general of the National Accountability Bureau.
It observed that a client was free to choose his counsel and governments, corporations and bureaus were free to appoint their law officers subject to the rules framed by them. It was not essential to advertise a law officer’s unless the law or rules so required.
BAIL FOR DOCTOR: Justice Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery, meanwhile, admitted Dr Kashif Matin, accused of extracting a patient’s kidney, to bail in the sum of Rs 300,000 along with a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.
Agreeing with the contentions raised by the applicant’s counsel, M. Ilyas Khan, the judge observed that the case was one of further inquiry. The prosecution has yet to produce sufficient evidence that complainant Kashif’s kidney was removed by the accused doctor.
