GBLR 2010

2010 GBLR 362 (PLP)

In re S.M.C. No.11 of 2009

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Appellate Court
Decided Date
2010-September-30
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, C.J., Syed Jaffar Shah and Muhammad Yaqoob, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2010 GBLR 362 (PLP)
Forum / Court Supreme Appellate Court
Bench Members Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, C.J., Syed Jaffar Shah and Muhammad Yaqoob, JJ
Parties In re S.M.C. No.11 of 2009
Primary Law Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 GBLR 362 (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 GBLR 362 (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Appellate Court bench comprising: Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, C.J., Syed Jaffar Shah and Muhammad Yaqoob, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 GBLR 362 (PLP) (In re S.M.C. No.11 of 2009). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009

Representation

  • ----Art. 61---Suo Motu Jurisdiction of Supreme Appellate Court---Shifting of stone crushing and stone cutting machine in Gilgit--Counsel for the contractor submitted that the contractor could be given special permission to continue the stone crushing machine and stone cutting machine installed at the site of Secretariat building and River View Road, which was installed only for the Government project without any other commercial activity---Advocate General without conceding the legal position had indirectly supported counsel for the contractor---Comments submitted by Director Environment department would show that conditional `No objection certificate' to the extent of cutting machine installed at River View Road could be given, subject to the giving of undertaking by the contractor for fulfilment of the conditions namely that project would not be used for any other purpose and that cutting machine would immediately be removed after completion of the work---Counsel for the contractor had given undertaking that the contractor would not operate unit without fulfilling the condition imposed by the Environment Department---Subject to all just exceptions and Environment Law, the contractor could on fulfilment of the condition, operate the unit of cutting machine at River View Road---When it was pointed out that stone crushing machine within prohibited zone could not be allowed to operate on any condition as no special favour could be extended to the contractor for installation of stone crushing machine in prohibited zone, the contractor without further agitating the matter, had requested for time to shift the stone crushing machine outside the prohibited area---Contractor was allowed by Supreme Appellate Court two weeks' time for shifting of stone crushing machine to a place outside the prohibited zone---Order accordingly.
  • Mr. Amjad Hussain, Advocate for Petitioner.
  • The learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant Mr. Shakeel Ahmed (Contractor) submitted that applicant may be given special permission to continue the Stone Crushing Machine and stone cutting Machine installed at the cite of secretariat building Jutial and river view road, which have been installed only for the Government project without any other commercial activity. The learned counsel submitted that Environment Department would have no objection in operating the unit at the site as these units were installed before the establishment of Environment Department in Gilgit and that the Director Environment Department in his report placed on record has agreed for issuance of conditional NOC. The learned Advocate General without conceding the legal position has indirectly supported the learned counsel for the applicant. The perusal of comments submitted by Director Environment through his Assistant Director, would show that conditional NOC to the extent of Cutting Machine installed at river view road can be given, subject to the giving of undertaking by the applicant for fulfillment of the conditions namely project shall not be used for any other purpose, the Cutting Machine shall immediately be removed after completion of work and a tank shall be constructed for waste water so that polluted water may not directly fall in river.
  • The learned Advocate General submitted that cutting Machine installed at river view road subject to the above conditions may be allowed, with the direction of the construction of fencing wall around the unit. The learned counsel for the applicant has given undertaking that proprietor of unit (applicant) will not operate unit without fulfilling the condition imposed by the Environment Department and construction of fencing wall as protective measures. Subject to all just exception and environmental law, the petitioner may on fulfillment of the condition referred in comments of Environment Department with construction of fencing/protection wall operate the unit of cutting Machine at River Review Road.

Headnotes / Summary

Art. 61

Suo Motu Jurisdiction of Supreme Appellate Court

Shifting of stone crushing and stone cutting machine in Gilgit--Counsel for the contractor submitted that the contractor could be given special permission to continue the stone crushing machine and stone cutting machine installed at the site of Secretariat building and River View Road, which was installed only for the Government project without any other commercial activity

Advocate General without conceding the legal position had indirectly supported counsel for the contractor

Comments submitted by Director Environment department would show that conditional `No objection certificate' to the extent of cutting machine installed at River View Road could be given, subject to the giving of undertaking by the contractor for fulfilment of the conditions namely that project would not be used for any other purpose and that cutting machine would immediately be removed after completion of the work

Counsel for the contractor had given undertaking that the contractor would not operate unit without fulfilling the condition imposed by the Environment Department

Subject to all just exceptions and Environment Law, the contractor could on fulfilment of the condition, operate the unit of cutting machine at River View Road

When it was pointed out that stone crushing machine within prohibited zone could not be allowed to operate on any condition as no special favour could be extended to the contractor for installation of stone crushing machine in prohibited zone, the contractor without further agitating the matter, had requested for time to shift the stone crushing machine outside the prohibited area

Contractor was allowed by Supreme Appellate Court two weeks' time for shifting of stone crushing machine to a place outside the prohibited zone

Order accordingly.

Judgment & Decree

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant Mr. Shakeel Ahmed (Contractor) submitted that applicant may be given special permission to continue the Stone Crushing Machine and stone cutting Machine installed at the cite of secretariat building Jutial and river view road, which have been installed only for the Government project without any other commercial activity. The learned counsel submitted that Environment Department would have no objection in operating the unit at the site as these units were installed before the establishment of Environment Department in Gilgit and that the Director Environment Department in his report placed on record has agreed for issuance of conditional NOC. The learned Advocate General without conceding the legal position has indirectly supported the learned counsel for the applicant. The perusal of comments submitted by Director Environment through his Assistant Director, would show that conditional NOC to the extent of Cutting Machine installed at river view road can be given, subject to the giving of undertaking by the applicant for fulfillment of the conditions namely project shall not be used for any other purpose, the Cutting Machine shall immediately be removed after completion of work and a tank shall be constructed for waste water so that polluted water may not directly fall in river. The learned Advocate General submitted that cutting Machine installed at river view road subject to the above conditions may be allowed, with the direction of the construction of fencing wall around the unit. The learned counsel for the applicant has given undertaking that proprietor of unit (applicant) will not operate unit without fulfilling the condition imposed by the Environment Department and construction of fencing wall as protective measures. Subject to all just exception and environmental law, the petitioner may on fulfillment of the condition referred in comments of Environment Department with construction of fencing/protection wall operate the unit of cutting Machine at River Review Road. The learned counsel when pointed out that stone crushing machine within prohibited zone cannot be allowed to operate on any condition as no special favour can be extended to applicant for installation of stone crushing machine in prohibited zone, and that in similar situation a number of units have already been shifted outside the city under the direction of this court, he without further agitating the matter has requested for time to shift the stone crushing machine outside the prohibited area. Consequently, the applicant proprietor of machine is allowed two weeks time for shifting of stone crushing machine to a place outside the prohibited zone. This Suo Motu Case No. 11 of 2009 with the above directions/observations stand disposed of. H.B.T./39/GLT Order accordingly.