SHC seeks reply from govt, FIA, Rangers in missing persons’ case

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) expressed annoyance on Thursday with the police and Sindh Department of Interior over the pleas for the recovery of more than 70 missing people and sought reply from the Department of Interior, Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), Rangers director-general (DG) and others. The court also summoned a progress report about the recovery of missing persons by February 13.

A division bench, comprising Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto and Justice KK Agha, heard the pleas for the recovery of more than 70 missing persons in which the court remarked that letters should be written to sensitive institutions, jails and others to find clues about the missing persons. It should be inquired if any of the missing persons are in custody of any jail or institutions. It should also be inspected if the missing persons have fled abroad.

The petitioners’ counsel argued that the police and other institutions don’t do anything except paper pushing. Salaries of investigation officials should be blocked and actual efforts should be made for the recovery of missing persons. Justice Phulpoto remarked how could the action be taken against anyone until the responsible authorities were detected.
The petitioners argued that Junaid Iqbal, Nabeel Akhtar, Hussain Nazi and others were missing for months.

Baldia incident compensations

The SHC granted extension to the Sindh government for submitting its reply to a plea regarding the non-payment of compensation to the families of affected in the Baldia factory fire incident till January 24. A two-member bench heard the plea in which the petitioner’s counsel Usman Farooq argued that Provincial Minister Nasir Shah announced in a ceremony that the payment of Rs560 million on May 1 will be made in compensations. The court remarked that it was not possible that the amount was not paid after such an announcement. The court instructed the government lawyer that if the announcement had been made, it should be acted upon. Sindh Employees Social Security Institution (Sessi)’s counsel argued that they will pay the money if the Sindh government and related authorities ordered them to pay the money in a single instalment. The petition had stated that an amount in excess of Rs600m was available but was being paid in the form of pension. They demanded that the compensation be given as lump sum payment, it stated.

In 2015, KiK Textilien, a German company, had provided an amount in excess of Rs600m to Sessi.

Residential plots in commercial use

The SHC was displeased over the non-compliance of its orders issued against the commercial use of residential areas and ordered on Thursday that the related institutions submit the progress report. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan and Justice Kausar Sultana Hussain heard the plea against the commercial use of residential areas.

No Karachi Metropolitan Corporation (KMC) representative appeared in the hearing. The court ordered Karachi Mayor, Lines Area Development Authority Project Director, Sindh Building Control Authority (SBCA) and others to conduct a joint action. SBCA’s counsel argued that the elimination of encroachments did not fall under the SBCA’s purview.

Justice Khan remarked that these were illegal constructions, not encroachments. SBCA counsel said that SBCA couldn’t operate on public land, to which Justice Khan replied that take police assistance and eradicate the illegal constructions. “If police does not seem effective then Rangers are available, but the illegal constructions should be eliminated.”

SBCA counsel argued that Lines Area Development Authority had the authority over some areas. Counsel of Lines Area Development Authority maintained that the authority stops the commercial use of residential areas but the people start doing it again. Our job is to shut the shops, not to raze them.

Petitioner’s counsel Syed Attaullah argued that the people are influential that’s why none of the institutions take action against them. The orders are not being complied with since 2012. The contempt of court action should be taken against them.

Source: The Express Tribune