KARACHI: Jamaat-e-Islami’s Saifuddin Advocate, who was the Nazim of union council 6 in 2007, when the residential plot on which the Nasla Tower was later constructed was given commercial status, says the job of his UC office was only that of a postman.
He explained that the UC office used to dispatch the applications of change in the status of land to the master plan department with or without objections. The Muttahida Qaumi Movement’s Mustafa Kamal was Karachi’s mayor at that time, so the department was under him.
The plot’s original area was 780 square yards (sq yds), but commercial status was accorded to 1,044 sq yds. The Supreme Court recently directed the city commissioner to remove all occupants from the building in the Sindhi Muslim Cooperative Housing Society (SMCHS), and then demolish it.
The court observed that after the examination of the record, there was no doubt that the building was constructed on encroached land, and among other things, also blocked the service road.
With just one objection by the non-profit Shehri, Saifuddin had issued a no-objection certificate for the conversion of land use on March 13, 2007, during his term as UC-6 Nazim.
On September 22, 2007, when Kamal was mayor, the master plan department under the City District Government Karachi formally approved the plot’s conversion from residential to commercial status, allowing shops, offices and flats to be constructed.
As a matter of routine, after publishing a notice for holding a hearing to listen to objections, the department used to share the cases of conversion of land status with the relevant UCs, explained Saifuddin.
“Whatever objections were raised during the public hearing, we used to forward them to the master plan department,” he said, adding that the final approval for commercial status was the department’s job.
“Karachi-like situation prevails in Islamabad too,” says IHC CJ
Meeting will be attended by senior judges including Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Munib Akhtar
Officers stress importance of this correction to safeguard promotion opportunities for eligible officers
Justice Mansoor of view that there were no significant constitutional or legal questions in this particular case