Following was outstanding dues as on 30

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P. No.D-2092/2009

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE

03-02-2010:

Mr. Makhdoom M. Azam, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Shaikh Riaz, Advocate for CDGK.

Mr. Miran Muhammad Shah, AAG.

- - - - - - -

Learned AAG states that the Sanad claims to have been issued are bogus and fictitious and no title on the basis of such document could be claimed. It appears that not only the claim of the petitioner appears to be of doubtful nature but it also appears that official respondent are also over sighting such unauthorized encroachment in rampant usurp of the public property. We would direct the Secretary, Land Utilization Department, Govt. of Sindh to take initiate action immediately to carry out the verification of the subject property as the State is the custodian and shall preserve and protect such properties from any unauthorized occupation and file report as to what action has been taken against the delinquent whether private persons and/or public functionaries within four weeks.

Mr. Munir-ur-Rehman, holds brief for Mr. Iqbal Khurram, Advocate for respondent No.7, files a statement and states that the subject Goth is situated in Na-class No.5 in Deh Bhitti Amri, Sector 51-52, Scheme No.33, Karachi, does not fall within the jurisdiction of Malir Development Authority.

In this view of the statement made by Addl. A.G. the Sanad filed by the petitioner are forged. We are not inclined to extend ad-interim order.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C. P. No.D-232/2010

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE

03.02.2010:

Mr. Ghulam Akbar Punhoon Uqaili, Advocate for the Petitioner alongwith petitioner.

Mr. Munir Ahmed Chandio, Advocate for Respondent No.4.

Mr. Muhammad Aqil, Advocate.

Mr. Haleem Siddiqui, Advocate.

Mr. Shafi Muhammad Memon, AAG.

---- - - - - -

Learned AAG points out that the election of the committee is proposed to be held on 07.02.2010, whereafter the Chairman and Vice Chairman will be elected and their statutory duties including Executive Committee to be constituted on even date. By consent, it is ordered that till then, no further action will be taken by the Respondent No.1.

To come up after two weeks.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P. No.D-600/2009

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

03.02.2010:

Mr. Hijrat-ur-Rehman, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ghulam Haider Shaikh & Mr. Aqeel Mehmood, Advocates for KBCA.

- - - - - - -

Petitioner has claimed certified copy of the approved building plan in respect of the subject plot No.64, Block-3, C.P. Berar Cooperative Housing Society, Gulshan Town. Learned counsel for KBCA states that such copies have been provided to the petitioner. He further states that the building on the subject plot has been approved for ground with loft (shops) + 1 to 3 floor for parking, 4^th floor for recreation area and fats + 5^th to 11^th floor for flats vide approval dated 24.11.2007. He stated that building has since been completed and completion plan has been approved on 17.06.2009. Since the petition has served out its purpose we would dispose of this petition with the directions to KBCA to ensure that the parking and recreation area are retained and maintained as per approved plan.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P.No.D-511/2009

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

03.02.2010:

Mr. Ikram Aziz, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Saifuddin, Advocate for the respondent No.5.

- - - - - - -

Learned counsel for respondent No.5 states that the petitioner is trying to settle the personal dispute that only a toilet is constructed in old time which is sought to be demolished. Let the inspection be carried out by the Nazir within ten days after due notice to the respondent and the petitioner is cautioned that in Nazir's inspection if it is found that this is old construction the petition may be dismissed with heavy cost. Nazir fee of Rs.5000/- is fixed to be paid by the petitioner to be adjusted towards cost.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P.No.D-47/2010

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

03.02.2010:

Mr. Zakir Hussain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Hifzur Rehman, Advocate.

Mr. Muhammad Idrees, Advocate.

Mr. Shaikh Riaz, Advocate for CDGK.

Mr. Miran Muhammad Shah, AAG.

- - - - - - -

Mr. Hifzur Rehman, Advocate, files vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No.8 and so also Mr. Muhammad Idrees, Advocate, files vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No.3. Learned counsel for respondent No.8 wants to file the comments. Let the same be filed in office with copy to the petitioner. Learned AAG filed comments on behalf of the respondent No.7.

Learned counsel for CDGK requests for time to file comments. Let the same be filed within two weeks and let it be ensured that if any construction be raised in violation of the approved building plan on a public street the CDGK and respondents No.3 & 4 may take strict action in accordance with law.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P.No.D-95/2010

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

03.02.2010:

Mr. Rafiq Ahmed Kalwar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Shaikh Riaz, Advocate for CDGK.

Mr. Shahid Jamiluddin, Advocate for KBCA.

Mr. Miran Muhammad Shah, AAG alongwith Abid Hussain, Sub-Inspector, P.S. Boat Basin.

- - - - - - -

It is stated that another C.P. bearing No.300/2010 in respect of same controversy is already filed. Office is directed to fix both the petitions on the same date before the same Bench..

Ad-interim order passed earlier to continue.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P.No.D-1158/2009

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

03.02.2010:

Mr. Abdul Wahab Anwari, Advocate for the petitioner.

- - - - - - -

Petitioner is directed to file the residential address and the copy of CNIC of the president Naeem Khan, of the petitioner's society. It is alleged that on a residential plot bearing No.JM 370/1, Muhalla Islam Gunj, Jamshed Town, Karachi, a commercial construction is being raised without approved building plan. Let notice be issued to the respondents through regular mode as well as courier and pasting. Let the subject premises be inspected by Mr.Mazher Ali Siddiqui, Assistant Registrar, alongwith ACB/DCB, who is directed to associate with the inspection alongwith approved building plan. Inspection fee of Rs.7000/- is fixed to be paid by the petitioner to be adjusted towards the cost.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P.No.D-254/2009

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

03.02.2010:

None for the petitioner.

Mr. Arshaque Memon, Advocate for the Intervenor.

- - - - - - - -

Bailiff was called, who states that he has mistakenly filed the notice in some other court. He is cautioned to be careful in future. Notice be repeated through courier as well as pasting on the petitioner. If none appear on the next date the petition may be dismissed.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P.No.D-2588/2009

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

1. For order on Misc.1098/2010

2. For order on Misc.12619/09

3. For Katcha Peshi.

4. For order on Misc.2620/09

03.02.2010:

Mr. Abdul Wahab Anwari, Advocate for the petitioner.

- - - - - - -

1. Granted.

2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.

3-4. Petitioner complains inaction on the part of the respondent holding back for the permission of road cutting for the installation of the utility services. Let notice be issued to the respondent as well as DAG.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P.No.D-1099/2009

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

1. For orders on Misc.No.6386/09

2. For Katcha Peshi.

3. For orders on Misc.No.6389/09

03.02.2010:

Mr. Raza Hashmi, Advocate for the petitioner.

- - - - - - -

Learned counsel for the petitioner claims that the disputes has since been resolved and on instructions withdraw the petition, which is allowed to be withdrawn with no order as to cost alongwith all pending applications.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P.No.D-1882/2009

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

1. For hearing of Misc.No.219/10.

2. For Katcha Peshi.

3. For hearing of Misc.No.9513/09

03.02.2010:

Mr. Ch. Khalid Rahim, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Zubair Hashmi, Advocate for the respondent.

Mr. Muneer Ahmed, Advocate for the intervenor.

- - - - - - -

Learned counsel for the respondent undertakes to produce all the notices stated to have been issued to the petitioner before taking the impugned action. Let such document be filed with copy to the petitioner within seven days.

Interim order passed earlier to continue till next date.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P.No.D-1993/2009

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

03.02.2010:

Mr. Zafar Ali Shah, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Shaikh Riaz, Advocate for CDGK.

Ms. Cookie Rawat, Standing Counsel.

Mr. Miran Muhammad Shah, AAG.

- - - - - - -

Learned AAG states that the comments have been filed. He further states that the list of the cases involving similar controversy has been filed in the office.

Till next date the tower if installed or made operational subject to the order of the Court. Notice be repeated on unserved respondent if any.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P.No.D-909/2009

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

03.02.2010:

Mr. S.S. Mumtaz Alam, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ghulam Haider Shaikh, Advocate for the KBCA.

- - - - - - -

Nazir report filed on 12.10.2009 is taken on record. Nazir reported that as per information ACB, Gulberg Town, informed that the subject premises has been sealed which seal stated to be intact by the respondent. According to the learned counsel for the KBCA the action has been taken against impugned construction in accordance with law. Let the report be filed in office and copy thereof be supplied to the petitioner.

J U D G E

Nadeem

O R D E R S H E E T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Crl. Bail Application No.1193/2009

ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES

FOR HEARING

04.02.2010:

Mr. A. Q. Halepota, Advocate for the applicant.

Ms. Rehana Akhter, DPG.

- - - - - - -

For the reasons to follow. The applicant is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.500,000/- (Rupees Five Hundred Thousand Only) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, however, it may be observed that the applicant shall associate with the investigation, inquiry and/or trial without fail. Any abuse or misuse of the concession of the bail, the trial Court will be at liberty to cancel the same. The accused if not required in any other case may be released.

J U D G E

Nadeem