Haq Nawaz

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

W.P. No._____________/2001 1.

Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan wife of Ahmad Yar Khan, R/o 287/B Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan.

2.

Mst. Naseem Akhtar wife of R.N. Rahat Nawaz, R/o 536/D Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan.

3.

Haq Nawaz S/o Haji Nazar Muhammad, caste Arain, R/o 51 Block “F”, Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan Petitioners VERSUS

1. Multan Development Authority, through its Director General. 2. Director General, M.D.A. 3. Director, Estate & Land Management, M.D.A. 4. Rainbow International (Pvt.) Ltd. through its Managing Director opposite Hyundai Multan Motors, L.M.Q. Road, Multan. Respondents

Writ Petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

Respectfully Sheweth: 1. That the names and addresses of the parties have correctly been given for the purpose of their summons and citations.

2. That the petitioners are residents of Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, which was proposed, designed, established and controlled by respondents No. 1, 2 & 3. 3. That the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3, at the time of establishment and designing of the said colony provided all civic facilities to meet the requirement of future e.g. space for graveyard, dispensaries, schools, parks, streets, roads, etc. At the time of allotment, the price of these plots provided for civic facilities was charged in the shape of development charges. This colony was established about 20/22 years ago, but uptill now, no facilities are provided completely. Even the roads and streets are incomplete in that area. 4. That since last 15 years, due to the climatic effect, hygienic problems, stress & tension and other prevailing circumstances, the residents of this colony like in other area, are going to become the victims of different diseases like diabetes, hypertension and other heart problems. The walk is only treatment which does not cost to anybody. In this situation, the residents of this colony submitted appeals to the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 and other Government functionaries. Ultimately, the National Bank of Pakistan came forward and after spending about one crore rupees, the Jinnah Park situated in this colony, was organized, walk tracks were constructed and after making other necessary arrangements, it was opened for walking and recreation facilities of the residents of this colony. Since last 6/7 years, the residents of Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony are enjoying the facility of this park. 5. That the residents of this colony were astonished when 3/4 months prior to this date, the respondent No. 4 started to destroy the walk tracks, installation of some turbine and machinery, construction and establishment of shops & Khokhas. The petitioners and other residents of the colony tried to explore the matter from the respondents, but could not succeed to get proper

information. Anyhow, it disclosed to the petitioners and other residents of the colony that the park is given to the respondent No. 4 by the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 for the establishment of a “Water Park”. 6. That one of the residents of this colony submitted an application for certain copies of by-laws and other documents on 26.6.2001 to initiate the legal proceedings, but the same was refused vide letter No. G-124/594/DTP/MDA dated 29.7.2001. The petitioners and

other

residents

of

the

colony

submitted

a

request/representation before the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3, but there was no response to this request/representation. Copies of application, letter and representation are Annexes “A , B & C”. 7. That the Director and Managing Director of respondent No. 4 are very influential persons having deep roots with the civil administration and bureaucracy, hurdled all the efforts of the petitioners; looking no way for the redressal of their grievance an application was submitted before the Hon’ble High Court, which was entertained on 4.7.2001 by Madam Justice Mrs. Fakhar-unNisa Khokhar, J. In this order, it was directed that a proper writ petition be filed by any aggrieved person. Copies of application and order are Annexes “D & E”. 8. That the subject of this application and order was published in different newspapers on which the respondents established a contact with some of the residents of the colony and assured that the contract agreement between respondents No. 1 & 4 shall be cancelled but under this plea, all the respondents accelerated the work of installation required in respect of Water Park. Now it is quite evident from the circumstances. The respondent No. 4 is going to start the operation of this water park within next few days.

9. That the act and action of commercialisation of a civic facility is illegal, unlawful and ultra vires inter alia on the following mentioned: GROUNDS a)

That the place/space, once earmark & for the public facility/civic facility for the interest of general public cannot be converted for any other purpose.

b)

That the duty of respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 after allotment, occupation and construction upon the plots remain to organize the record and to look after the colony.

They

are

authorised

to

remove

the

encroachments but certainly have no right to hand over the property of the colony to some other without the consent of the residents. c)

That the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 have charged the price of this park including all the other facilities provided in this colony, in the shape of development charges.

d)

That Rs. 10,000,000/- (one crore rupees) were spend to construct the walk-way and grass the said plot by the N.B.P. with the co-ordination and help of World Bank and destruction of the same is a loss to the Government exchequer.

e)

That Pakistan now-a-days is in the crisis of shortage of under-ground water and water level is going to be low. This type of water-park in the residential area requires a lot of water, which shall create a great problem for the shortage of water to the residents of this colony.

f)

That more than 150 houses including the houses of the petitioners are around this water park. There are slides

having height of more than 100 feet. The people will enjoy in short wearing which will effect the sanctity of “Chadar & Char Deewary”. g)

That the petitioners and residents of the colony shall be deprived from the facility of walk and recreation for which this park was meant at the time of establishment of this colony.

10.

That the petitioners and residents of this colony are left with no other adequate, efficacious and speedy remedy except to invoke the extra-ordinary constitutional jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Keeping in view the above-mentioned facts, it is respectfully prayed that: i)

The act and action of respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 for the handing over the said park to respondent No. 4 may please be declared as illegal, unlawful and ultra-vires.

ii)

The respondent No. 4 may please be directed to remove all the installations of shops and all other constructions in and around the said park.

iii)

The respondent No. 4 may please be directed to re-construct walk-ways and grass of the park at his own cost.

iv)

The respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 may please be directed to restore the said park to the petitioners and the residents of the colony for the purpose it was

ear-marked

initially

at

the

time

of

establishment of this colony (walk & recreation).

Any other writ, order, direction or relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit, may please be extended in the favour of petitioners to meet the ends of justice. Humble Petitioners, Dated: ___________

Through: 1. Abdul Aziz Khan Niazi, Advocate Supreme Court, District Courts, Multan. 2. Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176 3. Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959

CERTIFICATE: Certified as per instructions of the clients, that this is the first petition on the subject matter. No such petition has earlier been filed before this Hon’ble Court. Advocate

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

W.P. No. ______________/2001

Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc.

Vs.

M.D.A. etc.

AFFIDAVIT of: Haq Nawaz S/o Haji Nazar Muhammad, caste Arain, R/o 51 Block “F”, Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of the above-mentioned petition are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been kept concealed thereto. DEPONENT

Verification: Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day of August 2001 that the contents of this affidavit are true & correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001 In W.P. No.____________/2001 Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc.

Vs.

M.D.A. etc.

APPLICATION FOR DISPENSING WITH THE FILING OF CERTIFIED COPIES OF ANNEXURES. ========================================= Respectfully Sheweth:That certified copies of Annexures “A to F” are not available. However, uncertified/photo state copies of the same have been annexed with the petition, which are true copies of original documents. It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble court may please dispense with the filing of aforesaid copies of documents. APPLICANTS Dated: __________ Through: 1. Abdul Aziz Khan Niazi, Advocate Supreme Court, District Courts, Multan. 2. Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176 3. Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001 In W.P. No.____________/2001 Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc.

Vs.

M.D.A. etc.

DISPENSATION APPLICATION. AFFIDAVIT of: Haq Nawaz S/o Haji Nazar Muhammad, caste Arain, R/o 51 Block “F”, Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of the above-mentioned application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been kept concealed thereto. DEPONENT

Verification: Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day of August 2001 that the contents of this affidavit are true & correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

W.P. No.____________/2001 Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc.

Vs.

M.D.A. etc.

INDEX S. No. NAME OF DOCUMENTS 1

Urgent Form

2

Stamp Paper worth Rs. 500/- each.

3

Writ Petition.

4

Affidavit

5 6

Copies of application, letter & representation. Copies of application and order.

7

Dispensation Application.

8

Affidavit.

9

Application U/s 151 C.P.C.

10

Affidavit.

11

Vakalatnama

ANNEXES PAGES

A, B & C D&F

PETITIONERS Dated: _________ Through: 1. Abdul Aziz Khan Niazi, Advocate Supreme Court, District Courts, Multan. 2. Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176 3. Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001 In W.P. No.____________/2001 Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc.

Vs.

M.D.A. etc.

STAY APPLICATION. AFFIDAVIT of: Haq Nawaz S/o Haji Nazar Muhammad, caste Arain, R/o 51 Block “F”, Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of the above-mentioned application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been kept concealed thereto. DEPONENT

Verification: Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day of August 2001 that the contents of this affidavit are true & correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001 In W.P. No.____________/2001

Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc.

Vs.

M.D.A. etc.

STAY APPLICATION. Respectfully Sheweth: 1. That the prima facie case of the petitioners is strong one and there is every likelihood to be decided in favour of the petitioners. 2. That the disputed park was ear-marked as a civic facility and the status of the same cannot be changed with the sweet will of the respondents. 3. That the petitioners and the other residents of the colony have paid the price of this park in the shape of development charges. 4. That balance of convenience and balance of justice is in favour of the petitioners. 5. That if the respondents shall start the operation of this water park, the petitioners and the other residents of the colony shall face irreparable loss. In view of the above circumstances, it is respectfully prayed that the respondents may please be directed not start the operation of the said water park till the final decision of the main petition. Humble Petitioners,

Dated: _________ Through: 1. Abdul Aziz Khan Niazi, Advocate Supreme Court, District Courts, Multan. 2. Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176 3. Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959