HYDERABAD, Dec 22: The Hyderabad circuit bench of the Sindh High Court has directed the city taluka nazim to transfer possession of land to the contractor within one week of the approval of building plan so that he can commence work on the construction of bus terminal.

A division bench comprising Justice Mohamamd Moosa K. Leghari and Justice Maqbool Baqar passed on Tuesday the detailed order on a petition filed by a contractor who claimed to have won the contract through highest bid for a mega bus terminal off National Highway (Baldia bus stand).

A copy of the order obtained by Dawn on Friday said that the court also authorised the nazim to take appropriate action, in accordance with law, against the contractor if he failed to commence work or found in breach of the contract’s terms and conditions.

The judges ordered the Hyderabad Development Authority (HDA) to approve building plan of the project within one week from date of order strictly in accordance with relevant rules and regulations, and directed the petitioner to commence construction within 30 days of getting possession. He should complete the project as per agreement within two years of possession, the order said.

The contactor agreed to pay Rs1 million within a month from December 19 to be exclusively spent by respondent taluka nazim on setting up a public library in six months.

The court directed the contractor to have his guarantee extended for another 30 months and made it binding on taluka nazim to help the contractor in carrying out construction work and provide him all necessary assistance.

M/S Zulfikar Builder had through its managing director Mohammad Javed Shaikh who was represented by Adnan Memon, submitted the highest bid for bus terminal's project, which was approved by Sindh cabinet on September 17, 2001 and then sent back to the district government.

But the taluka city council arbitrarily and illegally raised the approved bid from Rs21 million to Rs41 million and rent amount to Rs7.7 million from Rs6.62 million with a bank guarantee of Rs80 million and again referred it to secretary local government who approved it amid the contractor’s protest.

The contractor said that he, however, complied with taluka nazim's requirements and furnished a bank draft of Rs5,250,000 as the first instalment, provided financial guarantee of Rs80 million, Rs15 million as advance instalment and Rs280,000 for judicial stamp paper for the execution of agreement for the project.

He again deposited Rs5,250,000 with taluka nazim on November 11, 2003 who had promised to get the land vacated. Finally, he was given work order on condition he would get the land’s possession after approval of the project’s modified plan by the HDA’s Building Control Department.

The petitioner said that HDA told him that the plan would be submitted to an oversee committee for approval despite the fact that all the utility services had issued him no objection certificates and the authority’s planning and development department had approved its layout plan.

He blamed taluka officer (infrastructure/services) for creating impediments to the plan and said that the officer submitted a report to taluka nazim claiming that the contractor had failed to get his plan approved by HDA and deposit Rs1,067,844 as advance security fee, and that the DCO had cancelled the site for bus terminal and directed the HDA not to pass the project.

The officer again got the taluka city council cancel the contract on February 3, 2005 but the council had to restore it after he moved the court. In the meantime his guarantee, issued on January 30, 2003 expired on January 30, 2004, he said.

He alleged that the taluka nazim’s staff was extorting huge amounts from encroachers, shopkeepers, transporters and cattle pen owners in return for keeping the structures they had erected on the site for bus terminal.

The present taluka city council again cancelled the contract through a resolution without hearing him and invited fresh bids through a tender, a step which he described as totally illegal.