SC verdict in Metro Train Project case today

The Supreme Court will announce its verdict in the Orange Line Metro Train Project case on Friday (today).

A five-judge larger bench, headed by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, had reserved the judgment on April 17 after hearing arguments from all the parties -- National Engineering Services Pakistan (Nespak), Lahore Development Authority (LDA), Punjab Transit Authority (PTA) and the Punjab government.

They had appealed against the Lahore High Court (LHC) verdict of August last year, which ordered for stopping the work on the project after setting aside a no-objection certificate (NOC) issued by the Archaeology Department.

The issue stemmed after the LDA initiated the process of acquisition of 1013.75 kanal land for the project in 2015. “As many as 158 cases were filed by different individuals against the land acquisition proceedings as well as amount of compensation announced by the LDA. Of these 148 cases have been disposed of by the high court, but 9 are still pending,” a source said.

SC reserves verdict in Orange Line Metro Project case

On 28 January 2016, the LHC stayed all construction activities within the radius of 200 feet of 11 protected immovable antiquity and special sites. Later, the Punjab government hired a team of the country’s leading lawyers, including Makhdoom Ali Khan, Khawaja Haris and Shahid Hamid, to plead its case before the SC.

“The deadline for completion of the project is December 25, 2017, which is unlikely to be met due to pendency of cases in the superior courts. The Chinese government has also expressed concern over delay in the project,” a senior Punjab official revealed.

Delay in Orange Line project ‘to result in huge losses’

Repercussions of delay

“The commitment charges of approximately $5 million will be imposed on Pakistan annually. Dispute in connection with the loan agreement, if not resolved through friendly consultation, shall be referred to the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) for arbitration,” he added.

The official said that the civil contractors had already submitted claims for delay or idling charges of machinery, equipment, manpower and escalation in prices of material and had requested to invoke arbitration clause to resolve these issues.

“In case of continued delay, the contractors have the option to terminate the contract which may result in additional construction costs due to increase in market prices of material and items,” he said, adding that the delay was also a source of inconvenience to public in routine life. “It is causing continued loss to traders and shop owners on the route.”

Azhar Sadique, counsel for the respondent in the apex court, rejected the Punjab government’s claim that the delay in the project was due to litigation. “The contractors are incapable of completing the project within the time duration. There are many areas where there is no stay order but construction work has not been completed as yet,” he added.