| ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court Thursday directed that the amount deposited in the account of its registrar’s office in Bahria Town case be transferred to the federal as well Sindh governments.
The order from the country’s top court came during the hearing of case by a three-member bench of the apex court.
Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa headed the bench comprising Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan and Justice Athar Minallah. The court directed that the total amount of Rs65 billion, including the amount remitted from abroad in the registrar’s account, should be remitted to the federal government, while the amount directly deposited by the Bahria Town management be remitted to the Sindh government.
“It would be wrong to retain this amount, and any amount earned on mark-up will be remitted to the Government of Pakistan,” the court noted down in its order after conducting day-long proceedings.
The court directed the National Bank of Pakistan to complete the exercise and submit compliance report to its registrar office. “As regards the balance of amount, we agree with the advocate general that the same amount be remitted to the Government of Sindh,” the court further noted down in its order. The court dismissed the plea of Bahria Town seeking reassessment of amount for 11,747 acres of land allotted to it by the Malir Development Authority against the required 16,896 acres for its Super Highway Project in Malir.
Upholding its judgment delivered on March 21, 2019, the court held that non-implementation of its judgment would be proceeded against.
“We have been very much cautious of jurisdiction and want to clarify that the order of March 21, 2019 subsists and if any party does not comply with the order, the order itself is clear what has to happen and take appropriate action,” the order said. The court held that Bahria Town, as per the deal, encroached upon more state land which was not possible without the help of government officials.
In this regard, the court noted down that the advocate general had assured that he will convey the concerns to the government. The court expected that the law officer will take action against the responsible persons. The order of March 21, 2019 was issued with the consent of Government of Sindh and Bahria Town, the court noted, adding that the Bahria Town had agreed to pay Rs460 billion within seven years.
However, Salman Aslam Butt submitted that as the Malir Development Authority did not provide Bahria Town with 16,896 acres of land as had been agreed to earlier, they stopped the installments, the court noted. The court further noted that the counsel also raised objections to the report submitted by the Survey of Pakistan stating that it had occupied 3,031 acres of additional land than what was agreed with the Supreme Court.
This was revealed in a report submitted to the apex court by a 10-member survey team headed by the Karachi commissioner on the land occupied by Bahria Town, Karachi. The court further noted down in its order that the advocate general had submitted that in pursuance of court’s direction, a team was constituted for conducting the survey of the land and representatives of Bahria Town also accompanied the survey team.
“Now the question arises as to whether an agreement, made with the consent of both parties which had become the order of the court, also could be unilaterally refused,” the court questioned and held that the answer was a ‘No’.
The court noted that it was surprising that the Bahria Town had filed various applications but did not press for their urgent hearing pursuant to Rules Supreme Court Rules 1980.
“It appears that the applications were filed maybe on pretext to avoid the implementation of court’s order of March 21, 2019 and it is abuse of court,” the court noted down in its order.
The court further held that people spent their life saving money for purchasing plots but they were left at the mercy of developers of housing societies.
“We expect that not only the Sindh government but also all other governments will make a legislation for the protection of people who purchase plots,” the court noted in its order. The court further noted that in this age of technology, record of private housing societies could be kept at the government level.
The court also disposed of the application of Malik Riaz regarding the probe being made in 190 million GB Pounds stating that as the NAB is also investigating the matter, hence it would not be appropriate for the court to pass any remarks or observations.
It is pertinent to mention that in his CMA, Malik Riaz had submitted that various matters, including with respect to the amounts and their utilization for the benefit of BTPL, was being investigated by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), under the provisions of the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, 1999 on various allegations and was directly a subject matter of such proceedings under the NAO.
Various notices in this regard have already been issued by NAB to BTPL’s representatives as well as its Chief Executive Officer Malik Riaz Hussain, which are being responded to in accordance with law as well as the rights guaranteed under the Constitution, Malik Riaz submitted.
He had submitted that as per the settled principles of law as enunciated by this honourable court, the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution cannot, in any way, prejudice the lawful authority of the institutions nor can the same cause any prejudice to the parties to any investigation by any such institution.
Any direction, order, or observation by this court, which causes any of the above is not desirable. He contended any finding, observation, or proceedings in relation to the amount may undermine/prejudice the rights of the parties, including the applicants herein, in the proceedings being undertaken by NAB under the NAO, on directly the same matters, allegations, and disputes; and, even otherwise, (b) matter related to the amounts, remitted from abroad for the benefit of BTPL, it is respectfully submitted, is beyond the scope of the present proceedings, being undertaken by this court with respect to judgment dated 04-05-2018 and is a matter in respect of which no separate proceedings under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, as contemplated by law, have or could be initiated, Malik Riaz had submitted.
Earlier, Salman Aslam Butt, counsel for Malik Riaz, sought time for submitting his reply in response to the report submitted by the Survey of Pakistan after raising objections to the report submitted by DC Karachi. |
|
