HYDERABAD, Jan 10: The Additional Advocate-General (AAG) Sindh, Masood A. Noorani, on Wednesday began inquiries regarding six commercial projects of the city whose legality was questioned in a public interest litigation by a resident of the area, Ikramuddin alias Guddo. The directive was issued by a division bench of the Sindh High Court Hyderabad circuit bench on December 13, 2006.

He considered some structural points of Maskan residential complex that is built in place of Rahat cinema in violation of building plan and asked the assistant director of Hyderabad Development Authority, Farooq Khan and senior inspector Maqbool Ahmed, to verify parking area's measurement as per building plan of another project namely Digital Centre amidst protest by some residents that plaza's parking area would cause great trouble for people of the locality and motorists on the narrow road.

The bench had directed the AAG to visit the commercial projects to determine whether the same are constructed and/or being constructed strictly in accordance with approved plan. He was also required to determine whether plan's approval in respect of said building/project is in consonance with relevant law, rules, regulations and by-laws and are in conformity with zoning scheme, if any.

He visited two projects.

The Executive engineer of provincial building department, Akhtar Hussain Dhawach, office superintendent of AAG's office, Yaqoob Qureshi and the applicant assisted AAG during inspection. He visited Maskan residential complex and found that builder didn't remove projection structure in deviation of the approved plan. He noted that the width of the building varied at different points on road whose width was noted at 28.6 ft. while building-to-building width was found at 38 ft. He observed that approaching stairs of plaza were not within the allotted premises. He noted that parking was allocated in basement which is exclusively for residents while buyers could not use it.

He noted that projection structure had been disapproved in plan but it was still built by builder in violation of plan. Likewise, he said, a ramp on its western side was not built as plan's requirement.

The proprietor of building informed that there was provision for the ramp but due to litigation by a neighbour it was not constructed and undertook to do so immediately if high court desired it. The AAG while jotting down notes believed that when plaza lacks provision of ramp how would parking be ensured for residents themselves.

The AAG told accompanying journalists that he was to verify whether plazas in question were or being built in accordance with approved plans and whether those are in consonance with building by-laws. The quality of material, provision of ventilation, drainage and sewerage lines are to be examined. He was shown no objection certificates (NOCs), issued by Water and Sanitation Agency (WASA) for obtaining water supply through one diameter line from WASA's six diameter water pipeline.

He said that HDA director-general would be asked to produce relevant designs and soil test reports of project to him adding that one water storage tank having a capacity of 12,000 gallons of water per day was built but for overcoming water shortage no additional tank is available. The builder informed him that one more tank would be built although it was not envisaged in plan.

A large number of people gathered outside the Digital Centre, a multi-storey commercial-cum residential project, when the court official arrived there. They complained that the width of the road at this point was narrow, builder was allowed to reserve parking space on the first floor which would not only make parking difficult but create problems for pedestrians on road when vehicles are driven to and from the narrow ramp but AAG did not hear their grievances. One resident Mr.Sana claimed that when he raised objection against this building, he was shot at and injured on the behest of the builder, Anwar Memon. A former resident of the area Javed Channa told AAG that it was a small haveli where the "Centre" is being built with 56-flats besides several shops. “How is it going to meet sewerage and drainage needs? How the vehicles are driven on first floor from road? Its quite mind-boggling”, he commented.

The residents said that while HDA has approved the plan it did not consider problems caused in the vicinity because parking of another project (to be inspected today) was also kept in basement for which ramp had been built on roads. They said that parking lots of both projects would be a great source of trouble for residents and high court must do away with it.

The executive engineer found ramp, envisaged in plan, as per its approved formula for keeping parking on first floor. He asked HDA assistant director and senior inspector to verify whether parking area of 7065 sq.ft has really been reserved out of total area of 13275 sq.ft. The AAG was visibly satisfied with water storage capacity and found ramp's provision in order. He called for soil test report as residents said that land is water-logged.