KARACHI, March 5: The Sindh High Court asked the Karachi Building Control Authority on Friday to produce the approved plan of the Japanese consulate-general's building by March 17.
The under-construction building on plot number CL-6/2, Frere Town, off Abdullah Haroon Road, is alleged to be violative of the building rules by a private company having its head office on the adjoining plot. Justice Shabbir Ahmed had asked the SHC nazir in December 2003 to inspect the site and ascertain the correct position in respect of the building and its approved plan.
The nazir went to the site as directed but was not allowed access to it. The construction company official present at the site declined to provide a copy of the approved plan.
The reason stated by the builder was the 'diplomatic immunity enjoyed by the consulate-general' against institution of suits in the host country. The KBCA official present at the site, however, showed the nazir drawings of the plan.
The plaintiff moved for urgent hearing of his suit through its counsel, Faisal Kamal Alam. It said diplomatic immunity did not cover the violation of building rules and prayed that the KBCA be directed to file the approved plan to enable the nazir to compare it with the structure raised.
Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmany, who heard the plaintiff's urgent stay plea on Friday, observed in his order: "Prima facie it appears that the nazir was denied entry into the construction site on the basis of diplomatic immunity. Even the approved plan was not given to him.
"In my tentative assessment, diplomatic immunity can be claimed by the Japanese consulate-general on a number of counts, including filing of civil suits against it in a court of law. However, this cannot be extended to a case of alleged violation of an approved building plan.
"In the foregoing circumstances, the chief controller of the KBCA is directed to positively place on record the approved building plan of the suit property in question."
The court fixed March 17 as the next date of hearing and also issued notices of the stay application to the defendants for that date.
HSC BOARD'S PLEA: The secondary education board requested the Sindh High Court on Friday to dismiss a writ petition by a school against the use of its premises as an HSC examination centre.
It would not be possible for the board to inform all 200 candidates due to take their exam from March 8 at St Peter's School, Clifton, of change of venue, Advocate Abrar Hasan submitted before a division bench comprising Justices Anwar Zaheer Jamali and Gulzar Ahmed.
Any change of venue or schedule at so short a notice would also put the candidates to extreme inconvenience. It would also set a precedent for school managements to seek shifting of exam centres after their notification and intimation by the board, the lawyer submitted.
The school, represented by Barrister Mubarak Ahmad, does not want to host the exam as it would disturb its academic schedule. It might also create a law and order problem, according to the petitioner. The bench adjourned further hearing of the petition to Saturday.
ABL SHARES CASE: The Sindh High Court asked the federal government, the Privatization Commission and the State Bank on Friday to submit their comments by March 11 on a writ petition seeking disposal of the remaining 49 per cent of the Allied Bank shares only through the stock exchanges or publication of prospectus as provided by the Companies Ordinance.
A division bench comprising Justices Anwar Zaheer Jamali and Gulzar Ahmed also restrained the respondents from taking any action adversely affecting the petitioner shareholders' interests in the meanwhile.
The petition has been moved by two private companies which claim to own a majority of the 51 per cent ABL shares already sold. The shares are yet to be transferred in their names and they remain 'ostensible shareholders'.
The petitioners submitted through Advocate Anwar Mansoor Khan that the respondent federal government had only 49 per cent shares left in the ABL. It could no longer deal with the majority shares and, that too, to the detriment of the majority shareholders.
They said the bank's capital could also not be enhanced by the government to affect their position. The 49 per cent shares could not be disposed of through private negotiations.
The petitioners requested the court that the respondents be directed to transfer the shares sold to them in their name before taking any decision in respect of the bank. No decision could be taken without consulting the majority shareholders, they said.