LHC rejects LDA’s request to dispose of housing society case

LAHORE:Justice Shahid Jamil Khan of Lahore High Court on Friday rejected a request of the Lahore Development Authority (LDA) for disposing of a petition that questioned the alleged corruption in Punjab University Employees Housing Scheme, commonly known as Town–III.

The petitioner Khurram Shahzad, an assistant professor at the university, alleged that massive corruption was committed in the Town causing loss of investments by large number of employees. LDA's counsel Waseem Arif Bhaddar stated that an application seeking approval for the housing society was withdrawn and the matter against respondents was pending before the Anti-Corruption Establishment (ACE).

He said the prayer made in the petition was against the LDA where matter was not pending; therefore, the petition became infructuous. However, the judge did not agree with the stance of the LDA’s counsel and observed that question about the absence of the eligibility criteria for establishing a housing scheme was raised during the previous hearing.

He remarked that this case was an example of unregulated housing society using the name of an institution like Punjab University. The judge observed that the question needed to be answered by the government and in particular, the secretary for housing, who was responsible to ensure remedy to the persons who invested in the housing society because of the name of the university.

The judge said the Punjab government was already framing rules for proper regulation of the private societies to ensure that representation of the citizens investing in the housing societies was protected by getting the societies registered under the Cooperative Societies Act, 1925.

The LDA's counsel told the court that the eligibility criteria was very much part of the draft, which was finalised. The petitioner told the court that the property in question had been alienated during the pendency of his petition. At this, the judge said registration of cases would be ordered in this case and directed the LDA to take up the matter in the upcoming meetings. The judge adjourned the hearing until Oct 27.