Vague use of rules: IHC reserves verdict on non-conforming use of property

Proprietors of guest houses, restaurants, boutiques, beauty parlours want court to stop CDA from harassing them


Rizwan Shehzad September 21, 2016
Terming the CDA’s actions as against public interest, the proprietors’ urged the court to stop the authority from harassing and humiliating petitioners and to allow them to continue their activities in their respective premises. PHOTO: INP

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court on Wednesday reserved its verdict on cases related to non-conforming uses of properties located within the federal capital.

After the petitioners concluded their arguments in the case, Justice Aamer Farooq reserved his judgment. The case had been taken up at the IHC after it was returned by the Supreme Court.

A total of 70 guesthouse proprietors from different parts of the federal capital challenged the Capital Development Authority (CDA)’s notices which alleged non-conforming use and violation of the Islamabad Residential Sectors Zoning (Building Control) Regulations 2005 and the CDA Ordinance, 1960.

Separately, several restaurants, boutiques, beauty parlours, and think-tank institutes too had challenged the CDA’s actions. The court later clubbed all the cases together.

Among the petitioners was Pakistan Peoples Party Senator Sherry Rehman. Being the president of Jinnah Institute Trust (JIT) located in Sector F-6/1, she challenged an eviction notice by the CDA for non-conforming use of her property.

Explaining that the institute engages policy makers, government officials, media organisations, civil society members, state institutions and academia, Rehman had argued that shifting JIT’s office to any commercial area would increase the risk of a terrorist attack on a visiting dignitary and would put the public in harm’s way.

Proprietors of the guest house said CDA issued notices without mentioning the precise nature of non-conformation and instead threatened petitioners with demolition of their properties.

Their counsel, Akram Sheikh, said that the petitioners had been providing “bed and breakfast” facilities in different sectors in their lawfully constructed premises.

“[The] notice fails to clarify what is considered non-conforming use,” he stated, adding that the notices threatened petitioners with heavy fines and sealing of their premises unless they stop operating.

Sheikh explained that his clients were challenging notices against the use of residential buildings as guest houses, adding that providing accommodation to paying guests is a lawful activity and cannot be considered non-conforming use.

The petitioners further argued that CDA Ordinance, 1960 does not define non-conforming use, home occupation, residential building. The law further attributes a wide and vague meaning to the word “building”.

Terming the CDA’s actions as against public interest, the proprietors’ urged the court to stop the authority from harassing and humiliating petitioners and to allow them to continue their activities in their respective premises.

Rehman asked the court to direct the CDA to allow her to use the JIT’s premises for its stated purpose and not be harassed any further to vacate it.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 22nd, 2016.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ