KARACHI - A petition was filed in Sindh High Court (SHC) on Friday against alleged meddling of US diplomats in internal affairs of Pakistan. The court was requested to restrain the US officials from muddying politics through supporting opposition parties and meeting with Pakistani politicians for fanning unrest in the country. The plaintiff, Sohail Hameed Advocate, maintained that after the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, US administration was now meddling in the internal affairs of Pakistan through indirectly controlling the political parties and compelling the present government to surrender to the demands of the opposition. He submitted that Pakistan was created after countless sacrifices and as per constitution of Pakistan (Objective Resolution), government was bound to defend the territorial integrity of the country Pakistan and ensure independent governance in accordance with the principles of the Islamic ideology. He further said that meetings of the US diplomats with top Pakistani politicians were aimed at fanning political crisis and stoking communal hatred and terrorism in the country. The plaintiff made respondent to President of Pakistan, Prime Minister, Secretaries for Interior and Foreign Affairs in his petition pleading for a check to the unabated US meddling into internal matters of the country with a view to ensure independence of the country. Creek Marina case: tax officials asked to settle issue Sindh High Court (SHC) disposed off two constitution petitions moved by Creek Marina, a Singapore based construction company, by issuing directions to Income Tax officials to decide the case of petitioner within the period specified by the court. The division bench of SHC comprising of Justice Ather Saeed and Justice Salman Ansari after hearing the arguments from both the sides issued the direction to the respondents. The said company filed the petition to SHC through Barrister Faroogh A Nasim advocate against alleged excesses by the Income Tax department and levy of Income Tax under Section 36 which provides levy of tax if construction is under taken on long term contract basis. The counsel from the plaintiff appearing for the petitioner, earlier submitted that Section 36 is not applicable in the case of petitioner as construction was not started on the basis of long term project. He also submitted that it was an independent contract between Creek Marina and persons purchasing the apartments. He also volunteered to deposit a sum of Rs2.5 million as security amount. The plaintiff's counsel informed the court that despite notice of the petition and an order passed by the bench, Special Assistant to Income Tax Commissioner refused to accept the notice. He also informed that IT department took steps to grab money of the petitioner lying with the bank. The bench took a strong exception and advised the respondents to obey the orders. The bench later ordered the petitioner to deposit Rs2.5 million as earlier volunteered by him. The court also ordered Bank Al-Habib to keep rupees 5 million of the petitioner frozen, while the entire rest amount to be released enabling the petitioner to carry out its day to day functions. The court with this order, disposing off the petition, also directed the Commissioner IT to decide stay application by petitioner within three days and adjudge main application, case within seven days. The appellate authority was also directed to follow the suit, hear and decide appeals in the matter within ten days time. The petitioner purchased a 776 square meter land in DHA and planned construction of super luxury apartments. On the other side, Justice Munib Ahmed Khan of High Court of Sindh (SHC) ordered the Executive District Officer (EDO) Education, Karachi region to inquire into delay in payments of pension and other benefits of a lady teacher who died accidentally in January 2000, leaving four heirs. The bench was seized with the hearing of a succession case filed by Shaukat Bano, sister of deceased Sultana Bano, a drawing teacher at Government Girls Secondary School, Mission Road, Karachi. The bench noted that the matter is pending since seven years. As per government pension rules, the pension case/documents should have been processed in six months prior to the date of retirement of an official, observed the bench adding that the payment shall be made within a week of retirement enabling the recipient to do some other business or else.