SHC seeks details of residential properties that have been commercialised

The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Monday directed the Sindh Building Control Authority (SBCA) and the Sindh Master Plan Authority (SMPA) to submit details of the residential properties in Karachi that have been commercialised on the basis of an impugned notification, which was later repealed by the SBCA.

The direction came on a petition challenging the SBCA notification with regard to the commercialisation of residential as well as amenity properties in the city. Petitioner Tariq Mansoor Advocate said the impugned notification was issued in violation of the Supreme Court’s order restraining commercialisation of residential and amenity properties in the city. He said non-commercialised properties have been commercialised on the basis of the impugned notification.

The SBCA’s counsel Dhani Bux Lashari said the impugned notification had been repealed, and sought time to verify when the said notification had been repealed. An SHC division bench headed by Justice Mohammad Iqbal Kalhoro directed the SBCA and the SMPA to submit details of the properties that have been commercialised on the basis of the impugned notification.

The court said if the SBCA and the SMPA claim that no property was commercialised, the heads of these departments should file their personal affidavits to support their claims on November 10.

The petitioner claimed in his petition that the impugned notification had been issued prima facie to benefit certain individuals in order to commercialise their properties. The SHC had earlier disposed of an identical set of petitions filed by political parties and rights activists after the SBCA director general’s statement that the impugned notification as regards amendments to the Karachi Building & Town Planning Regulations, 2002, had been repealed after further review and consideration.

The petitioners had said in their petitions that the impugned amendments would violate the basic rights of citizens and open the floodgates to commercialisation of residential areas, as any house could be used for any commercial activity.

They said the amendments ripped amenity plots of their status and the government would be able to use them for any purpose. They added that the amendments were a clear violation of the Karachi Development Authority Act, 1958, and the SC rulings.

They also said the impugned notification had exceeded its authority and gone beyond the vires of statute. They added that the amendments would turn residential areas into commercial or semi-commercial areas.

They pointed out that this would disturb residential areas’ peaceful environment, and residents would be facing obvious mental agony and tortures, compounded with traffic noises, while hundreds of strangers would be crossing into the vicinity due to the sudden permission of carrying out commercial activities.

They said “residential area” means a place dedicated to only residents, without having any commercial activities. They added that the amendment to Regulation 18-4.2.2 removed the requirement of inviting public objections before seeking to convert a residential property to a property that could also be used for education and health.

They pointed out that this snatched the rights of neighbours to be heard before residential plots in their neighbourhoods can be used for education or health purposes. The petitioners maintained that the SC had also imposed a ban on converting residential properties into commercial or residential-cum-commercial properties, so the impugned notification was beyond the scope of the SBCA, which had assumed itself the authority that could alter the city’s master plan.