Allotment of prized plot: For lawmakers, rules are meant to be broken

Parliamentarians insisted the plot be allotted in violation of CDA bylaws.


Danish Hussain March 06, 2013
The lawmakers neglected three agenda items of public interest and pressurised city managers to give a timeframe for the prized plot’s allotment to a well-connected man. PHOTO: APP/FILE

ISLAMABAD:


A parliamentary panel on Wednesday set a new precedent for favouritism in allotment of an industrial plot to an individual in violation of rules. The lawmakers neglected three agenda items of public interest and pressurised city managers to give a timeframe for the prized plot’s allotment to a well-connected man. His moves to garb the plot has already been scuttled multiple times by the Capital Development Authority (CDA) board, the Islamabad High Court and the Federal Ombudsman.


The three items skipped by the National Assembly Standing Committee on Cabinet Secretariat related to a model village of the capital, the overall performance of CDA in the last five years and Park Enclave.

Background of industrial plot

The episode started when the CDA received an application for a plot from Ilyas Cold Storage in I-11/1 along with a non-refundable Rs50,000 bank draft in 1993. There were 56 other candidates for the same plot.



A month later, CDA revised its policy and made open auctions mandatory for disposal of industrial plots under the Land Disposal Regulation 1993. The agency refunded the amount to the 56 applicants. Two years later, Ilyas Cold Storage approached the Federal Ombudsman against CDA decision, which rejected his petition. The complainant filed a review petition requesting that his case be processed under Land Disposal Regulations 1988. The ombudsman accepted the plea but the CDA board rejected the request in 1997. The complainant once again approached the ombudsman which upheld the CDA board decision.

Meanwhile, the complainant approached the CDA top officials through the Cabinet Division, the Prime Minister and the President’s secretariats. Following immense pressure by politicians, the case was again referred to the CDA board which decided in 2010 that  the industrial plot should be disposed of through open auction, under the Land Disposal Policy, 2005.

The applicant moved the Islamabad High Court last March which ordered CDA to consider the case in accordance with rules. The case was sent to CDA’s Law Directorate, which decided that “The case may be considered in accordance with the Islamabad Land Disposal Regulation 2005 rather 1993.” The Islamabad Land Disposal Regulation 2005 states that disposal of commercial plots could be done through open auction.

The complainant approached a member of the National Assembly, who took the case to the National Assembly Standing Committee on Cabinet Secretariat which constituted a sub-committee. The sub-committee recommended that the industrial plot be given to the firm for just Rs90 million despite the fact the market value of the plot is much higher.

CDA’s concern

A senior official of the authority, requesting anonymity said, “If CDA allots the plot to Ilyas Cold Storage, 56 other applicants will move the court against CDA. It will set a precedent and we’ll be left with no other option but to allot costly industrial plots at throwaway prices.” CDA does not want to violate various decisions of its board, the federal ombudsman and the Islamabad High Court, he added.



Committee proceedings

Committee Chairman Dewan Bokhari said despite assurances, city mangers seemed reluctant to allot the plot. “Please give us a timeframe,” he requested. “We’re going to take the issue to the CDA board, where it will be decided,” said Chairman Tahir Shahbaz.

Bokhari said, “No one knows if you’ll still be chairman, but I’ll no more be MNA after March 16.” Shahbaz assured him the issue would be made part of the upcoming CDA board meeting’s agenda.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 7th, 2013.

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