PHOTO: INP/FILE
Hearing a plea seeking the issuance of the number plates, a two-member bench, comprising Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed, was informed that number plates for vehicles in the city had not been issued for the past two years.
The petitioner's counsel, Advocate Asim Iqbal, claimed that at least 200,000 to 300,000 vehicles in Karachi were not issued number plates and owners of the vehicles lacking number plates were often "harassed by traffic police officials."
At this, Justice Mazhar inquired, "What is the traffic police DIG doing [in this regard]?"
Motorists’ woes: 200,000 cars still wait for their registration plates in Sindh
The DIG's spokesperson informed the court that only vehicles bearing fancy number plates were flagged down by traffic police officials. The court was also told that steps had been taken to issue the number plates and 7,000 number plates were being prepared.
"What difference will just 7,000 number plates make considering that none were issued over the past two years," the court remarked. It further inquired why the vehicles were flagged down when the owners had been issued registration certificates.
At this, the government lawyer maintained that the traffic police DIG had issued new directives, pertaining to the matter, for the officials.
The court directed the Excise, Taxation and Narcotics Control Department to issue pending number plates for the vehicles immediately and restricted traffic police officials from flagging down vehicles and "harassing citizens" who had been issued registration certificates.
Judges' appointment
Meanwhile, a bench headed by SHC Chief Justice Ahmed Ali Shaikh and comprising Justice Omar Sial ordered the federal law secretary to issue the notification for the appointment of judges, as recommended by SHC, in two of the accountability courts.
Rebuking the secretary over the failure to issue the notification, Justice Shaikh asked him as to why the notification was not issued for the appointment of judges proposed by the court.
"Who are you to appoint the judges of your choice, ignoring the names we proposed? Under which law did you approve the appointment of judges not recommended by the court?" he admonished.
At this, the secretary replied that as per the law, the chief justice of a high court could only appoint judges after consulting the president.
"Should we now summon the president to consult him on the matter?" the justice remarked, adding "Does the Centre want to exercise influence on the province?" He further stated, "Did you appoint the judges [of your choice] in the accountability courts in Lahore and Islamabad?" The justice further said that "350 cases are pending in accountability courts in Karachi."
The court ordered the secretary to issue the notification for the appointment of judges proposed by the high court.
The SHC chief justice had sent two names to the Centre for the appointment of judges in accountability courts but the federal government proposed two other names for the posts.
Stay denied
Another bench, comprising Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan, refused to issue a stay order on the impending demolition of a marriage hall in Malir, as a part of the ongoing anti-encroachment operation.
The court directed the marriage hall's owner to prove the property's legal status in the court and issued notices to the senior member of the Board of Revenue, Sindh Building Control Authority director-general, Malir District deputy commissioner and mukhtiarkar and Sindh advocate-general, seeking their replies on the plea filed for the stay.
During the hearing, the marriage hall's owner stated before the court that he could produce the property's documents.
At this, the court remarked, "Where are those documents and whose signatures they bear?" The court asked the owner to reveal the names of the officials who approved the documents so that they could be summoned by the court. "Did the mukhtiarkar or the deputy commissioner sign the documents?" the court inquired.
Capacity Enhancement: New units to help handle number plate backlog
The hall's owner replied that the documents, in fact, bore the signatures of the assistant commissioner.
"Under which law was the assistant commissioner authorised to sign the documents?" the court rebuked.
The counsel for the petitioner, however, informed the court that his client had received a warning regarding the impending demolition and requested it to issue a stay on razing the structure.
However, the court denied his request, ordering him to prove that the hall was a legal structure.
Seeking replies from the parties and ordering the owner's counsel to present arguments on the maintainability of the plea at the next hearing, the court adjourned the hearing.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 11th, 2020.
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