KARACHI, July 18: A division bench of the Sindh High Court on Thursday stayed proceedings in a NAB court until the next date in an acquittal application filed by the 26 shop/showroom- owners of the Saddar Cooperatives Market who have impugned the reference pertaining to their allotment.

The bench comprised Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmany and Justice Musheer Alam. The plaintiffs were represented by Mahmood Alam Rizvi and S. M. Iqbal, advocates.

Counsel Rizvi referred to Ordinance 2/2000, Sindh Urban State Land (Cancellation of Allotments, Conversion and Exchanges) Ordinance-2000 by virtue of which an eight-member committee, including project director of the SCM, was formed to look into the affairs of the Saddar Cooperatives Market.

He submitted that as per notification (dated Nov 14) a committee had been constituted to prepare a draft for surrendering deeds and fresh agreements in the light of an understanding formalized between the existing so-called lease-holders of the SCM and the Army Monitoring Team.

Thereafter, the matter was resolved according to which wall- fixtures and shopowners were required to pay Rs 5,000 per square feet whereas showroom owners were to pay a lump sum amount of Rs 2.5 million. All the applicants paid the first instalment through a pay order.

Therefore, Mahmood Alam Rizvi, counsel for the plaintiff, argued that the matter was resolved but with mala fide intentions the anti-corruption people submitted a challan in which they showed 35 shopkeepers as accused beneficiaries who had allegedly caused a loss of approximately Rs110 million.

In the light of the surveyor report, the value was estimated at Rs 20,000 sq feet. Thereafter, counsel Mahmood Alam Rizvi claimed that the NAB had interfered in a closed and past transaction without considering the settlement reached with the AMT.

He claimed that this was not mentioned in the anti-corruption reference before the accountability court. Subsequently acquittal application by 26 was rejected. So quashment was applied.

In 1997, the then administrator, Anwar Khokhar, had decided that the tenants shall be given perpetual lease at the rate of Rs 5,868 per square yards as the same was the government gazette rate. So it was done. In 1998, the then administrator, Mr Sarwar Khero, had also decided that the perpetual leases shall be given to the tenants at the same rates decided in 1997 and he had delegated his powers to the project director for this purpose.

The anti-corruption establishment took up the above matter with the army monitoring cell, Karachi, and the shops of the tenants were sealed on Sept 17.

The tenants were called at the office of the army monitoring cell and a settlement was reached between the army monitoring cell, administrator, and the society that the tenants shall pay a larger amount in respect of lease value to the administrator at the rate of Rs 5,000 per square feet in respect of shops and wall fixtures and the tenants of the show-rooms shall pay a sum of Rs 25,00,000 for each show-room. The pay orders were given to the project director as the first instatement of the agreed 24 instalments.

An under-taking was also given by the shopkeepers and then the shops were de-sealed by the SDM, Preedy, Karachi. A tenant Mohammad Ismail had refused to submit the pay order and under-taking to the project director that’s why his shop was not de-sealed and he approached the high court for desealing of his shop vide CP.No.D-1492/2000. The court was pleased to order the de-sealing of the shop and the SDM concerned was directed to pay a cost of Rs 2,000.

After settlement with the army monitoring cell, the applicants attended the court proceeding regularly before the special judge anti-corruption, Karachi, from where the case was transferred to the accountability court.

The NAB had claimed that the above shops were leased out at a throw-away price and these be sold out to the tenants at the rate of Rs 20,000 per square feet. The shopkeepers/tenants had made payments on two forums as follows:

a) Rs 5,868 per square yard to the administrator.

b) Rs 5,000 per square feet to the army cell.

c) Rs 20,000 per square feet is the demand of NAB which has been impugned before this honourable court.

The Saddar Cooperative Market Limited is a private body corporate registered under an special statute, known as the Sindh Cooperative Societies Act, 1925. The society, from its own resources, had purchased the building from the KDA by paying its total construction costs of Rs 31,42,887.75. The payment of land had been made to the rehabilitation department by the society and all the dues were cleared.

It was the contention of the plaintiff that the Saddar Cooperative Market Limited was established and was functioning on the basis of “Cooperate Movement” and its purpose was to establish the people on self-help basis on the doctrine of “No-profit no-loss”. Therefore, the existing market value was not applicable.

The National Accountability Bureau had no jurisdiction to interfere with in its affairs in respect of basement, ground floor and first floor.

It was also their case that no court other than a civil court had the jurisdiction to cancel the leases granted by the project upon the recommendation of the society.

After the registration of FIR, the above issue was taken up by the Army Monitoring Cell and full and final settlement had been reached between the Government of Sindh and the shopkeepers under the “Sindh Urban State Land (Cancellation of Allotments, Conversions and Exchanges) Ordinance, 2000”. The NAB had interfered in a closed and past transaction without even considering the settlement with Army Monitoring Cell. This fact was not mentioned in the two charge-sheets, contended counsel Mahmood Alam Rizvi.

It was claimed that it was an admitted position that the amount received from perpetual leases shall be distributed among the society and the project at the ratio of 50 per cent each. The project shall hold 50 per cent of its share only for the purpose of smooth running of the society and its offices. Not a single penny shall be transferred in the government head of transferred in the government head of accounts. Therefore, the question of loss to the national exchequer did not arise.

It was their claim that the FIR, reference and final reports were based on mis-information and were not sustainable in the eye of law.

When the matter came up Aamir Raza Naqvi, representing the NAB, informed the bench that the NAB prosecutor, Mr Anwar Tariq was on general adjournment until May 29. Counsel Rizvi prayed for staying NAB proceedings in the case until the next date. The bench allowing the prayer adjourned the matter until July 29.