Resuming the hearing of multibillion dollar Orange Line Metro Train (OLMT) project on Thursday the Supreme Court observed that the mass transit scheme would not be allowed at the opportunity cost of national heritages and historical monuments. Five-member larger bench led by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan was hearing appeals seeking dismissal of Lahore High Court's stay order issued against the construction of OLMT project within 200-feet of 11 heritage sites of Lahore.
During the course of proceedings, Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh observed that members of the bench are not proficient to comprehend engineering technicalities so some technical experts are needed to assist the court in examining the reports of the experts in the matter in hand.
The judge further observed that the authorities concerned instead of making tall claims in papers for preserving the historical monuments and heritage should concentrate on taking practical measures and ensure the protection of national heritage. "Not only ensuring protection of these national heritages but steps taking for preserving these should be properly monitored as well," Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed observed.
He was of the view that apart from personnel taken from the government side in the monitoring team, some independent persons should also be included, saying whatever flaws are pinpointed by the monitoring team, they should be resolved at the earliest.
During the course of proceedings, the advocate general Punjab submitted there would be no damage to the historical and religious buildings due to metro train project. To which Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh remarked the British Parliament was not damaged due to metro train project in London in 1863.
Appearing on behalf of the civil society group, Asma Jahangir pleaded that her clients have nothing to do with the project but intended to preserve the national heritage, adding that Shalimar Garden is not their personal property but they want to preserve it for the future generations.
She contended that Punjab government had also made tall claims before the High Court that national heritages preservation should be ensured but the picture is quite different on the other side. At this Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh remarked the provincial government had stated if there would be any damage to the historical buildings then it will construct new buildings.
Mohammad Azhar Siddique, who is also representing the civil society, contended that at one side there is government machinery and on other are a lot of lawyers are defending the metro project.
Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan observed that the court will also examine the objections raised by the parties on the reports submitted by international experts on the consent of all the parties in the mater in hand. He questioned as to whether the technical experts had visited the sites and conducted soil tests or they did everything on the computer. Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan hinted at to summon technical experts for briefing, if required.
Counsel for executing agency of the project Lahore Development Authority (LDA), Khawaja Haris informed the bench that TYPSA was given task to analyse the NESPAK report on the project.
Responding to the court's query that Lahore High Court had expressed dissatisfaction over the Dr Apel report Khawaja Haris submitted that the high court had dismissed his report without examining the same. A member of the bench Justice Ijazul Ahsan observed prima facie it seemed that the high court did not examine Dr Apel report. Later, hearing of the matter was adjourned till April 10.