LAHORE - A Full Bench of the Supreme Court hearing the case of sky-rise buildings in the city Monday hinted at early disposal of the matter on the plea that thousands of workers had lost job after construction work had come to a standstill over pending decision on the case of plazas etc built in violation of rule and regulations. The Bench headed by Justice Faqir Muhammad Khokhar during the proceedings said it was paramount concern that that thousands of workers relating to the construction activity had been rendered jobless. Hence court should decide the matter at the earliest. In the interest of earlier disposal, the Court required the Advocate General Punjab, Khwaja Harris Ahmad and the Chairman Commission on the Sky-rise Buildings, Justice (r) Riaz Kayani to be present on the next date of hearing and also asked Legal Adviser to LDA, Mian Qamaruz Zaman to examine on the LDA end as many 150 cases of those buildings which the Commission has detected as not properly approved or not meeting the rules and regulations however stood up to the standard of structural stability. The court has fixed hearing of the case to Wednesday. Earlier, the court dismissed a review petition filed by LDA against the September 15 last order whereof the court had regularised shops at the back of Siddiq Trade Centre against the payment of Rs2.5 million. Mr Zaman argued that such a relief may become a precedent for other buildings while the LDA Rules prescribed that deviation of construction plan as done in the case in hand, was compoundable for payment of Rs2000 per square feet, as it was previously allowed to City Tower and MCB buildings. After hearing S M Zafar for the respondent, the court dismissed the petition observing that case in hand was different from the other buildings and decision in this case would not be used as a precedent. Advocate AK Dogar completed arguments for the under construction commercial plaza at the junction of Eden Road and Cooper Road. The counsel mainly assailed the suo moto jurisdiction under which the Supreme Court took notice of the building in question, which Commission had found encroached 210sq feet upon the Federal Government land which the counsel however, rebuffed on the strength of documentary proofs. Mr Dogar opposing the suo moto exercise of power by the SC submitted that law did not provide for the court to take on itself the role of a statutory body or that of another organs of the state. Suo moto power, he said, also denied right of appeal as after SC no court of appeal was left. Such a denial of appeal, he said, was not permissible under the law, particularly in the Islamic jurisprudence. As to the right of appeal, Justice Khokhar referred to Army Act, which the Federal Government had amended to provide right appeal against the court marshal. However under Article 186(a) of the Constitution on question of transfer of case from one court to another, no right of appeal is available. Citing Tariq Transport case, Mr Dogar questioned the appointment of Commission to identify illegally constructed buildings in the city and said, Court was not competent to order a general survey in this nature. Moreover, he said, illegal construction of a building was a disputed question of fact, which could not be dealt with under Article 184(3) and 199 of the Constitution, relating to the original jurisdiction of the Superior Courts, but by the civil court. And under the doctrine of separation of power between executive and the judiciary, the court cannot interfere into what was subject to the Executive. For Ahad Tower, advocate Amir Alam Khan adopted the arguments of Mr Dogar and questioned authority of Commission which, according to him, was harsh on them but was looking the other way on the under construction building of Salman Taseer (in Gulberg). He said the stability structure of his building has been verified up to mark and under the LDA rules fine can be claimed for the extra storeys. He said he presented revised plan to the Authority but it sat on the same to let someone come to them to grease the palm. Therefore the fault lies on the side of the Authority.