LAHORE: Lahore High Court Chief Justice Muhammad Qasim Khan on Tuesday observed that the project of Firdous Market underpass could be stayed as apparently there were violations of guidelines set by the Supreme Court.

The chief justice was hearing a petition filed by a company, Gateway Technologies, pointing out violation of several laws including requisites for land acquisition in the project.

A counsel for the company argued that the affectees of the project were not given a mandatory opportunity of personal hearing before the start of the project. He said the contract of the project awarded to a company, Maqbool Kolsan, which, he claimed, had been blacklisted in projects of Lahore Orange Line Metro Train and Peshawar BRT.

He also alleged that the government forcibly acquired land for the project from owners against their will and also paid them below the market price. He further claimed that the construction plan of the underpass was replete with technical errors as safety of the buildings in the vicinity was at risk due to digging process.

Petitioner says contractor blacklisted in Orange Line, BRT projects

The counsel argued that elected representatives of local government had the mandate to carry out such development projects but the Lahore Development Authority (LDA) initiated it by usurping the powers of municipal corporation.

Chief Justice Khan observed that apparently the project had been launched in violation of the apex court’s decisions. He said the court could halt the project if the government failed to come up with a satisfactory reply.

“The court can also shut down the whole LDA,” the chief justice warned the counsel of the authority and directed him to come fully prepared on next hearing (July 9).

RING ROAD: Apetition was filed on Tuesday in the Lahore High Court challenging changes to design of Ring Road Southern Loop-III (SL-III).

A citizen, Ilyas Chaudhry, through his counsel contended that in the initial map of SL-III a straight road was suggested but later Ring Road Authority (RRA) altered the design to give some favour to its blue-eyed [contractor]. He said mandatory prior approval was not sought from relevant municipal council to amend the design.

The petitioner said not only him but a number of people were badly affected by changes to the design as their land will go to the project. He said the land acquisition commissioner issued a notification regarding acquisition of land without hearing objections of the affectees.

The petitioner asked the court to declare the changes to the design illegal and set aside the impugned notification about land acquisition.

Published in Dawn, June 24th, 2020