ISLAMABAD-The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Wednesday directed the Capital Development Authority (CDA) to submit its detailed reply in a case related to the payment of compensation to the affectees of different CDA sectors.
A single bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice of IHC Justice Athar Minallah issued the directions while hearing the petitions of the affectees of different sectors of the federal capital.
During the hearing, the Chief Justice remarked that incidents of crime and land grabbing had been increasing while the affectees were waiting for their right. He said that even a single plot would not be allotted to anyone till the payment of compensation to the last affected person is paid.
Special Assistant to the Prime Minister on CDA Affairs Ali Nawaz Awan was also present in the court in this case. He told the bench that the affectees were being invited in every meeting pertaining to the matter.
He said that they were trying to resolve the issue of plots of 1,300 affectees. He also said that now the balloting was being conducted through National Database Regulatory Authority (NADRA). Chief Justice Athar remarked that there was a conflict of interest into the affairs of CDA. He added that if the affected person approached any officer for solution of their issue, the concerned official is also found involved in it.
After this, the court deferred hearing of the case till September 18 for further proceedings.
Meanwhile, the same bench also suspended a notification issued by the AGPR to halt the pension of former director general FIA Bashir Memon and directed the authority to submit a report after reviewing the matter.
During the proceedings, Chief Justice Athar asked from the representative of AGPR that under what law the pension of someone could be stopped.
The AGPR counsel pleaded that Bashir Memon had resigned from his post. Then the court asked that if there was any ban on tendering resignation.
Justice Athar said that his resignation was accepted and documents were completed then what was the reason to stop his pension.
He also questioned that why the pension of the former director general FIA was stopped when the AGPR had prepared relevant documents. He also asked that whether the department had stopped the pension of any other such senior officer in the past.
The AGPR lawyer said that the pension was stopped under section 465 B(1).
At this the bench observed that this law was not applicable on the petitioner. After this, the court directed the AGPR to review its decision and adjourned the case for ten days.