Illegal kiosks: CDA given two weeks to submit report

Petitioner's counsel argued that it was the CDA’s primary responsibility to remove illegal kiosks.


Our Correspondent October 18, 2012

ISLAMABAD:


The Capital Development Authority (CDA) was directed to submit a report on the illegal kiosks on various greenbelts in Islamabad. The Islamabad High Court gave the authority two weeks to respond.


Justice Noor Haq Qureshi, while hearing the petition filed by Vice Admiral (retd) Ahmad Tasnim, for removal of illegally set-up kiosks, issued the directives.

Barrister Jehangir Khan Jadoon, counsel of the petitioner, argued that it was the CDA’s primary responsibility to remove illegal kiosks established in greenbelts.

He argued that the CDA spent millions of rupees on greenbelts, which were encroached upon by traders. He also requested the court to direct the CDA to clean up public parks and greenbelts.

After the preliminary hearing, the court adjourned the case for two weeks till November.

Masih’s restraining order extended

In a separate development, Justice Azim Khan Afridi of the IHC extended the restraining order against the trial of Rimsha Masih in a trial court until November 17.

Rimsha’s lawyer had filed a petition with the IHC seeking the quashment of the FIR against her. The FIR had been registered on the complaint of Malik Hammad.

But during the course of hearing on Wednesday, a new counsel, Chaudhry Abdul Aziz, representing Hammad appeared before the court and requested for more time to prepare the case. The court accepted his request and extended a previous restraining order to November 17.

On September 25, IHC Chief Justice had issued notices to Ramna Police Station Station House Officer, the investigation officer and Hammad in response Rimsha’s petition that had alleged that the FIR registered against her was based on mala fide intentions.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 18th, 2012.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ