close
Wednesday November 27, 2024

SHC restrains private school from using residential property in Clifton

By Our Correspondent
June 10, 2022

The Sindh High Court on Thursday restrained the owner of a private school from using the residential property in the old Clifton area other than as provided in the lease documents.

The interim order came on a petition filed by citizens who had challenged the conversion of the residential property off Shahra-e-Iran into a private educational institute in violation of the law.

The petitioners’ counsel submitted that the petitioners were residents of the area and challenged the illegal use of the residential property on Street 12 A off for commercial purposes. He said the entire area was residential and the private respondents had made attempts to use the premises in question for commercial purposes.

The counsel said that the width of the road was less than the minimum requirement for the conversion of the property from residential to commercial as provided in 25.5.2 of the Karachi Building and Town Planning Regulations 2002. Even otherwise, the property in question could not be used for any other purpose except residential.

He submitted that the establishment of an educational institute in the residential neighborhood would result in an increase in traffic, which would be a greater source of nuisance; besides, it would cause an unwanted influx of public, resulting in noise pollution and other disturbances in residential areas, which would be detrimental to the rights of the petitioners.

He pointed out that various residents had also filed civil suits in respect of similar disputes wherein interim restraining orders had been passed. He also referred to judgements of superior courts in which the courts barred commercial activities in residential areas.

A division bench, headed by Justice Mohammad Junaid Ghaffar, after the preliminary hearing of the petition, issued notices to the Sindh Building Control Authority, the private school owner and others and called their comments on June 30. The court in meantime restrained the private respondents from using the property in question for any purpose other than that provided in the lease documents of the property.