0
KARACHI, Nov 23: The chief controller of Karachi Building Control Authority (KBCA) was on Friday summoned by a division bench of the Sindh High Court to appear in person on next date and to show cause why an earlier order of the SHC pertaining to illegal construction was not implemented.
The bench, comprising Justice Ghulam Rabbani and Justice S. Ali Aslam Jafri, was hearing a constitutional petition filed by Shaukat Ali Qadri, challenging the illegally constructed ground-plus-six storey building in 1996.
Earlier, in 1996, another bench of the SHC, comprising Justice Wajihuddin Ahmed and Justice Ghulam Nabi Soomro, had ordered the KBCA to take action against the said illegally constructed building without considering the occupancy/interest created by the respondent, Abdul Razzak, owner of the disputed building/plot.
When the contempt of court application filed by Iqbal Haider came up for hearing before the bench, the court took strict notice that the earlier orders were not implemented and directed personal appearance of the KBCA chief controller on next date to be fixed by the office of the court.
HEARING DEFERRED: Hearing of an application for the former provincial food minister, Maqbool Ahmed Shaikh, was on Friday deferred by a division bench till Nov 28.
The bench comprised Justice Ghulam Rabbani and Justice S. Ali Aslam Jaffery.
Mr Shaikh, who was represented by Abul Inam advocate, had applied for the quashment of the impugned order of the Accountability Court (AC-II), by which his name had been included among the accused in an accountability reference pertaining to import of wine through fake permits in 1997-98.
His counsel filed power on behalf of ex-minister and sought time to file the amended application. The court fixed the matter for Nov 28.
On Nov 12, the AC-II Karachi had awarded three years’ rigorous imprisonment to the applicant for failing to comply with the non-bailable warrant.
Earlier, the applicant’s counsel contended that on Sept 12 the AC-II had included his client’s name in the list of accused, booked in reference No 10/2001, regarding import of wine permits and issued non-bailable warrants.
It was also his contention that the judge of the trial court, while recording the order, had held that despite the bar contained in section 18 (a) of the NAB ordinance 1999, he was competent to take cognizance of the offence under the NAB ordinance 1999 and that he could call any person irrespective of the fact that he was not included as an accused in the reference filed before him.
He prayed the court to examine the propriety, legality and the correctness of the impugned order of the trial court, dated Sept 12, 2001, and to set aside or quash the order.
