Military estate, CDGK or cantt board: SHC wants to know who controls FTC flyover | Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF)

Pakistan Press Foundation

Military estate, CDGK or cantt board: SHC wants to know who controls FTC flyover

*Advertising company claims to be stuck between paying two city agencies who both claim jurisdiction over the area and hence the revenue

*All land from Cantt station to Jinnah hospital turning is military estate, says CDGK EDO Law

KARACHI: All petitions in the FTC flyover case were clubbed together by a division bench of the Sindh High Court Friday that will decide who has control or jurisdiction over the structure. The hearing was put off till Tuesday.

The petition was filed by an advertising company that is challenging the demand for an advertisement fee by the Karachi Cantonment Board as they have already paid the money to the City District Government Karachi (CDGK).

During the course of arguments, CDGK EDO Law Manzoor Ahmed claimed the ownership of the flyover and said that the entire stretch of Shahrah-e-Faisal was constructed and improved by the CDGK without assistance from any quarter, agency or board.

He pointed out to the court that all the land from Cantt Station Karachi up to the Jinnah hospital turning was military estate.

The counsel for the petitioner, seconding the CDGK, said that while the CDGK and other authorities adhered to some laws, the “Station Commander works under no law”.

He read out a letter annexed with the petition, announcing the takeover of the FTC flyover.

The court grilled the CDGK lawyer on broken roads and bad sanitation. ‘You make bridges which fell apart,’ the bench observed. The EDO Law promptly replied that fallen bridges were not built by the city government or civic authorities but by the National Highway Authority.

The bench also asked what was done with all the money collected by the cantonment authorities.

How can the Station Commander take charge of these matters when his primary responsibility is to care for the rations of the units, observed the bench? It then later put off the hearing till Oct 9 but not before calling for a record of constitutional petition 969/2004.
Source: Daily Times
Date:10/6/2007