Karachi:
The High Court of the Sindh (SHC) was strongly decreasing on the Sindh Building Control Authority (SBCA) about its inaction against illegal construction in the metropolis, calling it “the most notorious institution of the government” and asking it to subject a compliance report before September 16.
The bench said in its remarks that a special pit in hell could expect corrupt SBCA officers who allow illegal structures, knowing that the building could collapse and kill residents.
A bench of two members, led by judge Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, heard a petition against an illegal construction in Ramzanabad, Garden West. The petitioner’s lawyer, Farjad Ali Khan, argued that only the ground structures plus one were authorized in the region, but a ground building and four had been raised, where commercial activities were also underway, in violation of zoning laws.
Managers of Karachi Metropolitan Corporation (KMC) and SBCA appeared before the court in accordance with previous orders. When he was asked what measures had been taken since the construction of the building in 2000, the director of the SBCA said that the case had only come to his knowledge recently and would now be implemented in accordance with the directives of the court.
The bench expressed strong dissatisfaction with the answer. “You will not do your job? Why is there a need for a court order? If someone dies, let him die-if the orders of the court, you will work,” said judge Kalhoro. He also observed: “Your work consists only of earning money under the table. SBCA is the most notorious institution of the government. There will be a special place in hell for SBCA officers.”
The court ordered the SBCA to take measures against illegal construction and to submit an implementation report at the next hearing.
LPG points of sale in residential areas
The High Court of the Sindh (SHC) eliminated a request against the operation of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) on Tuesday in the residential area of the Delhi colony after being informed that the stores had been closed.
The petition, deposited by lawyer Irfan Aziz, said that the presence of GPL stores in a densely populated locality posed a serious risk of accidents, which could damage residents in the event of an accident.
During the hearing, the government’s lawyer submitted a report informing the court that two dangerous LPG stores had been sealed, while a warning had been given to comply with the sops. The merchants had subsequently closed their companies and submitted affidavits for this purpose.
The petitioner also argued that commercial points of sale could not be built on residential plots. The bench, however, observed: “Don’t say that – stores have been built everywhere.”
By observing that the main grievance of the petitioner had been discussed, the court eliminated the case.
