2008 PLP 470 (CLC)
CITY SCHOOL (PVT.) LTD. — Petitioner Versus KARACHI BUILDING CONTROL AUTHORITY — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 470 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | CITY SCHOOL (PVT.) LTD. — Petitioner Versus KARACHI BUILDING CONTROL AUTHORITY — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance (V of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 470 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance (V of 1979) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 470 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 470 (CLC) (CITY SCHOOL (PVT.) LTD. — Petitioner Versus KARACHI BUILDING CONTROL AUTHORITY — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- ---Ss. 6(3), 7-A & 19---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Summary eviction of tenant---Petitioner who was tenant in respect of house in question, was running a school therein---Notice was issued to petitioner by the Authority, whereby petitioner was required to vacate house in question at the risk of summary eviction, remove unauthorized structure at the risk of demolition under S.7-A of Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance, 1979---Counsel for the Authority had conceded that power to cause summary eviction or demolish the building did not vest in the Authority and had explained that impugned notice was served in Standard Form and that concerned officer omitted to score out the provisions which were not applicable and Authority, was only interested in prosecuting petitioner for alleged violation of provisions of S.6(3) of Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance, 1979 in exercise of powers available under S.19 of said Ordinance---Held, if in view of the said undertaking, prosecution was eventually undertaken, petitioner would always have an opportunity to take up all defences available in law including the powers available under S.19 of the Ordinance---Counsel for petitioner having not pressed the petition, same was disposed of accordingly.
- Khalid Javed for Petitioners.
- Shahid Jameeluddin for Respondent.
Judgment & Decree
SABIHUDDIN AHMED, J.
The petitioners who are tenants in respect of House No.F-13/1, Block F, North Nazimabad, Karachi, and are running a school therein, appear to be aggrieved by notice from the respondent, dated 31-12-2003 (hereinafter mentioned the impugned notice) alleging that they are unauthorisedly running the school on residential premises and requiring them, in standard form, inter alia, to vacate the premises at the risk of summary eviction remove unauthorized structure at the risk of demolition under section 7-A of the Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance and to explain why they should not be prosecuted for violation of Sindh Buildings Control `Ordinance. Since Mr. Shahid Jameeluddin has already appeared for the respondent in response to pre-admission notice, we decided with the consent of both learned counsel to hear and dispose of this petition along with C.P. 1243 of 2003 involving similar questions. At the outset Mr. Shahid Jameeluddin, learned counsel for the respondent, candidly conceded that the power to cause summary eviction or demolish the building in the given circumstances did not vest in the respondent and explained that the impugned notice was served in standard form and the concerned officer omitted to score out the provisions which were not applicable. Nevertheless, the respondent was only interested in prosecuting the petitioner for alleged violation of provisions of section 6(3) of the Ordinance in exercise of powers available under section 19 of the Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance. In view of the above undertaking we are of the view that in case prosecution is eventually undertaken, the petitioner will always have an opportunity to take up all defences available in law including the scope of powers available under section 19 in the given circumstances. In view of the above undertaking which is taken on record, Mr. Khalid Javed does not press this petition which is disposed of as such along with listed application. H.B.T./C-22/K Order accordingly.