Court can’t allow govt to go back on its word: SHC

Orders Rs17m left over to be paid to owners of plot in front of British High Commission.

KARACHI: A disagreement over paying Rs17 million for a plot in front of the British High Commission gave the Sindh High Court the opportunity to stress that once government officers make an undertaking in court they cannot go back on it.

On Tuesday, the SHC’s Chief Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi rejected the government’s appeal and ordered it to pay the plot owner the money in ten days.

The plot is 405.2 square yards and located in front of the high commission in Clifton. A while ago construction was planned but the high commission had objected to this as it would have compromised its privacy and security. At first the Sindh government tried to stop the construction from going ahead by swinging the Karachi Building Control Authority into action. But the plot owners went to court and won the case.

As a solution, the court had suggested that the Sindh government acquire the land and pay the plot owners compensation. (The British High Commission would not have been able to acquire the land on its own).

This was done under the Land Acquisition Act of 1894. The owners were paid Rs81 million.

But then, Rs17 million was still left to be paid. The additional advocate general of Sindh argued, however, that they disputed this as the revenue EDO had no authority to write about this to the secretary of the Board of Revenue. He said that statements made by officials about the payment were not binding on the Sindh government.

The bench rejected this argument and regretted that different undertakings were made to pay the remaining amount of money.

“It may be observed that any statement or undertaking given by a party in the court of law has to be given sanctity,” the judgment said. If the court allowed the government to retract from this promise, public litigants would distrust the judiciary. This would “tarnish the sacred image of judicial officers” in front of whom the government promised it would pay. “It would become a mockery of the law and facts… The sanctity of judicial proceedings has to be preserved at any cost.”

Published in The Express Tribune, May 16^th, 2012.