AGL 35.72 Decreased By ▼ -1.28 (-3.46%)
AIRLINK 139.70 Increased By ▲ 0.93 (0.67%)
BOP 5.05 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.39%)
CNERGY 4.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.73%)
DCL 9.05 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-2.16%)
DFML 50.80 Decreased By ▼ -0.70 (-1.36%)
DGKC 80.02 Decreased By ▼ -3.13 (-3.76%)
FCCL 24.57 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.12%)
FFBL 46.23 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (0.28%)
FFL 9.13 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.44%)
HUBC 151.19 Increased By ▲ 0.93 (0.62%)
HUMNL 11.05 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (0.55%)
KEL 4.09 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-2.15%)
KOSM 8.51 Decreased By ▼ -0.21 (-2.41%)
MLCF 34.05 Decreased By ▼ -0.70 (-2.01%)
NBP 59.39 Increased By ▲ 1.24 (2.13%)
OGDC 142.30 Increased By ▲ 3.80 (2.74%)
PAEL 26.88 Decreased By ▼ -0.23 (-0.85%)
PIBTL 6.30 Increased By ▲ 0.26 (4.3%)
PPL 114.60 Increased By ▲ 1.35 (1.19%)
PRL 24.30 Decreased By ▼ -0.14 (-0.57%)
PTC 11.99 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.83%)
SEARL 58.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.30 (-0.51%)
TELE 7.85 Decreased By ▼ -0.14 (-1.75%)
TOMCL 41.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.50 (-1.2%)
TPLP 8.95 Decreased By ▼ -0.40 (-4.28%)
TREET 15.29 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-0.71%)
TRG 53.98 Increased By ▲ 2.03 (3.91%)
UNITY 28.80 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-0.86%)
WTL 1.42 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.7%)
BR100 8,401 Increased By 23.9 (0.29%)
BR30 27,190 Increased By 74.3 (0.27%)
KSE100 79,333 Increased By 315.4 (0.4%)
KSE30 25,027 Increased By 114.4 (0.46%)

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has struck down the creation of new plots in old sectors by the Capital Development Authority (CDA).

The Court has also ordered demolition of any structure or houses which were erected during the pendency of the case.

A single bench of IHC comprising Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq issued the directions in a case related to Sector G-11/3. The case was filed in the court by residents of G 11/3, Kamran Khan and Muhammad Asif through their counsels Pir Khizar Hayat and Umer Ijaz Gilani.

The petitioners alleged that in 2021, the CDA’s personnel showed up in the idyllic neighbourhood and informed them that new plots would be carved out in the open space which lay adjacent to the Nullah at the end of the street.

The petitioners challenged this on the ground that the layout plan of their area had already attained finality back in the 1990s. They contended the plots destroyed the calm and visual relief the space and also deprive children of space to play.

The petitioners’ counsels prayed for the cancellation of plots based, among other reasons, on the violation of the petitioners’ right to life under Article 9 of the Constitution of Pakistan. They further contended such carving out of plots damaged Islamabad’s beauty and posed a life hazard to residents by exposing the area to flooding. Similar allotment and construction close to nullahs had resulted in flooding in Sector E-11 in 2021, in which, a woman and her child lost their lives.

In its defence, the CDA had placed reliance on “Regulation of Amendment in Layout Plan 2019”, which were enacted in the wake of Safdar Zaman case. The Regulations purport to give CDA very wide powers to amend the layout plans of sectors in Islamabad. The CDA contended that the new plots had been carved out in pursuance of the enactment of Regulations of 2019.

The IHC judgment admonished the CDA for illegal creation of plots after the layout plan has been finalised. It noted that “instead of developing the huge areas of land available to CDA as new sectors, CDA is going around scraping the bottom of the barrel and scrounging for tiny spaces to create new plots in already developed sectors.” Even though such carving out of plots did not change the residential character of the area, it did change the “character of the residence” of the petitioners, which could not be done after a layout plan stood approved.

The Court ordered a house under construction on the site be razed and the debris be cleared from the open space within 30 days of the judgment. The allottees of the illegal plots, the judgement said, retained the right to seek any compensation they might be entitled to from the CDA through separate proceedings, including those of “tort of breach of public duty”.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed.