SHC dismisses plea against construction of Manghopir flyover

The Sindh High Court has dismissed an application for staying the construction of a flyover from Manghopir Road to North Nazimabad.

Nahid Noor and other residents of Mianwali Colony had sought an injunction and cancellation of permission for the flyover project. The plaintiffs’ counsel submitted that the plaintiffs were residents of Miawali Colony having sanads issued under the Sindh Gothabad Scheme.

The counsel submitted that the construction of a flyover was being carried out without an approved plan and in violation of the relevant rules and laws.

The counsel said the illegal construction of the flyover was being undertaken by reducing the width of the main road, which was detrimental to the residents of the area, and in the name of such illegal construction, the legal constructions of the plaintiffs were being removed.

The counsel contended that the flyover was being constructed in order to provide illegal favour to a housing project and police were also causing harassment to the plaintiffs. The court was requested to restrain the official defendants from carrying on further construction work of the flyover till disposal of the instant lawsuit.

The provincial law officer and other defendants’ counsel contended that the court had directed removal of encroachments along the road known as Millennium 2000 Road. They submitted that the plaintiffs have no legal titled document in their possession, as such, their application be dismissed.

A single bench, headed by Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, after hearing the arguments of the counsel, observed that the plaintiffs claimed that the defendants are dispossessing them forcibly

without taking into consideration the fact that they have Sanads duly issued in their favour by the competent authority.

The court observed that the plaintiffs failed to make out their case for an injunction as after perusal of the record it reflects that admittedly no Sanad has been issued in favour of the plaintiffs.

It further observed that the plaintiffs have failed to show any relation with the persons to whom Sanads have been issued and even the plaintiffs have failed to show that the persons to whom such Sanads were issued are their forefathers.

The court said that no pedigree certificate has been brought on record by the plaintiffs, who failed to substantiate their legal character, and dismissed the stay application as misconceived.