The Islamabad High Court has scrapped the Centre’s new policy of allotting government plots to civil servants, judges, generals, journalists, etc., in the federal capital.
"The Revised Policy and the scheme pursuant thereto, intended to be launched in sectors F-12, G-12, F-14 and F-15, are in derogation of public interest and violative of the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the people at large. Thus they are illegal, unconstitutional, void and without jurisdiction," read a judgment authored by IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah.
The IHC was hearing a petition filed by one Ednan Syed and 10 others against the Federal Government Employees Housing Foundation (FGEHF) that was later renamed the Federal Government Employees Housing Authority (FGEHA).
The court noted that the FGEHF, through an advertisement published in a widely circulated newspaper on September 30, 2009, had invited applications from eligible employees for registration as members.
“The membership drive was launched to register eligible employees of the federal government and other specified groups in order to determine their seniority regarding allotment of plots in the schemes launched by the FGEHF,” it added.
The court observed that the membership drive was based on the principle of ‘first come first served’. “The membership drive was for allotment of plots or housing offered in all the schemes launched or likely to be launched by the FGEHF/FGEHA.”
The court noted that perusal of the summary placed before the federal cabinet showed that 35,932 members were registered in the Membership Drive-1, out of which 7,074 were allotted plots in the then existing land bank or schemes of the FGEHF i.e. Green Enclave-I and Sky Garden. “[A total of] 28,858 members were sent offer letters, out of which 11,182 gave their acceptance and, simultaneously, deposited down payments. While they were awaiting their turn to be offered a plot in the next scheme, the policy was abruptly changed to their detriment upon the launching of the scheme in sectors F-14/F-15.”
In 2015, the then prime minister had approved launching of the scheme by the FGEHF in sectors F-14/F-15.
“The FGEHF, instead of accommodating the already awaiting eligible members who were registered in Membership Drive-I and their seniority stood determined on the principle of 'first come first serve', revised its policy.”
The IHC noted that the revised policy approved for distribution of the acquired land in sectors F-14/F-15 was premised on fresh registration on the basis of “age-wise seniority”.
“Those who had registered themselves in the Membership Drive-I and were awaiting their turn on the basis of the promised principle of 'first come first served' were ignored, rather, excluded from being considered for allotment of plots in sectors F-14/F-15.”
The court observed that it had carefully perused the “Revised Policy” and “regrettably it served the interests of a few elites selected through a non-transparent process”.
Read "SC set to hear petition challenging IHC’s restraining order on plots’ allotment"
The court held that the FGEHA nor the federal government was vested with power or jurisdiction under the FGEHA Act or the Capital Development Authority (CDA) Ordinance to launch a scheme or frame a policy which was contrary to the public interest and violative of the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the people at large.
A scheme launched by the FGEHA, pursuant to a policy framed by the federal government, will withstand Constitutional scrutiny if it benefits the people at large rather than enriching a few powerful classes.
The assets of the State acquired through the inherent intrusive power of eminent domain can only be used for the benefit of the people at large and in the public interest.
“The housing and works secretary shall place this judgment before the federal cabinet i.e. the worthy prime minister and its members within two weeks. They are expected to formulate and frame policies in future in the context of schemes launched under the FGEHA Act or the CDA Ordinance, as the case may be, having regard to the observations made herein,” the order read.
The IHC held that the federal government was expected to formulate and frame policies for development of sectors F-12, G-12, F-14 and F-15 solely for the benefit of the general public and in public interest, rather than enriching a few elites at the expense of the exchequer.
“This judgment shall not in any manner prejudice, interfere with or disturb the rights accrued in favour of property owners who were affected on account of the acquisition proceedings relating to sectors G-12, F-12, F-14 and F-15."
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