The petitioner’s counsel said the two lower courts dismissed the applications on grounds that an earlier plea was dismissed by the IHC and the CDA produced notices sent to the petitioners since 2013 which they had failed to comply with. PHOTO: IHC WEBSITE
Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani dismissed the petition as it had become pointless in light of the CDA’s termination of the land lease for the hotel and business complex on Constitution Avenue.
On Wednesday, the court had asked the parties to wait for an order in the case after the counsel for builders BNP, Malik Qamar Afzal, and the counsel for the CDA, Kashif Ali Malik, concluded their arguments.
CDA terminates land lease agreement of Grand Hyatt
In the verdict, Justice Kayani noted that the original case was regarding sealing of the hotel, and not cancellation of the lease, thus making the case infructuous. He subsequently dismissed it.
On August 3, the counsel for CDA submitted the lease cancellation letter before the court. Malik said the civic body acted in accordance with law while terminating the agreement.
He added that the CDA has the powers of a regulatory body to take the action. Besides, he said, the court has not restricted the CDA from exercising powers to decide on pending issues in accordance with the law.
He further said that the CDA board had taken interim measures in compliance with an IHC order from 2014. The counsel maintained that the petitioner had created third party interests without adhering to CDA bylaws.
Afzal argued that it was mala fide on part of the CDA to cancel the lease as the case was pending before the court. He added that the civic body terminated the lease just to weaken the petitioner’s case.
On July 1, the CDA sealed the under-construction complex, which included the Grand Hyatt Hotel, for various building and layout plan violations.
On July 4, the court had restrained the civic agency from taking further action against the builders. Justice Kayani had ordered the CDA that “no demolition...of any work will be undertaken.”
Grand Hyatt Hotel case: CDA restrained from taking coercive action
The directions were passed in response to Afzal’s petition claiming that the sealing of the premises was “illegal”. He had argued that the project, worth over Rs10 billion, will suffer loss if the impugned action is not addressed.
Among other violations, the CDA report cites post-bid changes, building plan violations, and sales of apartments without prior approval from the CDA.
Safa Mall goes to IHC
Meanwhile, the Safa Gold Mall management on Thursday petitioned the IHC in an effort to get the mall unsealed. Sessions courts dismissed similar petitions in the past few days.
The petitioner’s counsel said the two lower courts dismissed the applications on grounds that an earlier plea was dismissed by the IHC and the CDA produced notices sent to the petitioners since 2013 which they had failed to comply with.
The lawyer claimed that not a single notice was ever issued regarding sealing of the property. The case will be heard today.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 5th, 2016.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ