Islamabad: CDA apparently caught on the wrong foot on MPCHS

[Naveed Yaseen]

Mobarik A. Virk
The Capital Development Authority (CDA) has apparently been caught on the wrong foot over the first-ever public-private joint venture involving a private housing society to develop a stretch of land in one of the posh sectors of the metropolis.

The move, initiated on November 27, 2008, was evidently aimed at bringing in the private sector to shoulder two main responsibilities of the CDA, acquisition of land and dealing with squatters and developing basic infrastructure.

But, somehow, a specific clause that only those firms-companies that have land holding in that particular area, the Northern Strip of Sector E-11, which was being offered by the CDA for the joint venture, would be considered, effectively prevented the rest and the project landed in the lap of the Multi-Professional Cooperative Housing Society (MPCHS) which already had a presence in the area.

However Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry took suo moto notice of the situation following a spate of criticism against the public-private joint venture as it was asserted that land acquisition, dealing with the local inhabitants or squatters and developing basic infrastructure is the main responsibility of the CDA.

The two-member bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, comprising Justice Chaudhry Ijaz Ahmad and Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja, on August 13, 2009, took up the case and directed the CDA to immediately take over possession of 54 acres of land known as Northern Strip of Sector E-11 from the MPCHS. The bench told the CDA to return to the court on August 20, 2009, and present detailed documents regarding the deal, including byelaws of the MPCHS and profile of its sponsors. At the same time, it also directed the MPCHS officials to appear before the court on the same day and explain their position in the case.

Meanwhile, some interesting aspects have come to the fore in the case. The land under question being developed by the MPCHS as a joint venture’ with the CDA was acquired way back in 1969. This particular 54 acres of land forms a small part of the large Mera Berry village.

According to the record of the Deputy Commissioner (Lands) of the CDA, in 2004 there were only 88 structures present in that area out of which only two were the actual landholders while the remaining 86 were either relatives of the actual affected people of the area or squatters who have constructed structures there.

In his award announced in 2004, the Deputy Commissioner (Lands) of the CDA said that only two persons who owned land in the area were eligible for allotment of residential plots while the remaining 86 were entitled only for cash compensation against structures they had constructed in accordance with the laid-down rules of the CDA.

On the other hand, when contacted, the representative of MPCHS told ‘The News’ that they had not allotted any plot to anyone removed from the area when the housing society took over the possession and cleared the area for development.

“In fact we paid cash compensation through ‘crossed cheques’ to 1,000 individuals and the compensation amount was calculated at the rate of Rs1.75 million per kanal of land. We paid an amount of Rs960 million to these 1,000 persons through ‘crossed cheques’ after completing all legal formalities,” the representative of the MPCHS told ‘The News’.

He said that the sudden increase in the number of squatters-structures in the area from 88 to 1,000 was not something unusual as it had happened quite frequently in other sectors as well in the past.

Another intriguing aspect is that the MPCHS representative claims that they have cleared and constructed the north and east service roads of the Northern Strip of Sector E-11, but have not touched illegal squatters (qabza group) living in the greenbelt.

The clearance of this greenbelt is important for the development of Sector D-12 because it forms the services corridor under which main utilities like gas, sewerage and drainage system will pass to connect Sector D-12.

The representative of the MPCHS told ‘The News’ that clearing this area was not their responsibility, as it was not mentioned in the agreement they signed with the CDA. “We will do whatever is in our purview and nothing more,” he said.

Sources in the CDA, on condition of anonymity, told ‘The News’ that during last ten years the civic body deliberately cast a blind eye towards the issue of taking over physical possession of the land that was already acquired and where new sectors were already opened and plots allotted to the public through ballot or open public auctions.

“The main focus of the CDA over many years remained on developing roads in the already developed sectors like the 7th Avenue or the 9th Avenue or construction of bridges and flyovers besides improving the existing infrastructure. Like past, we failed to make the best use of the opportunity that came our way during the rule of General Pervez Musharraf when we could have taken over the possession of acquired land much more easily. However those who headed the CDA over all these years never paid attention to this nagging problem and it kept blowing in proportions in all directions,” conceded a senior CDA official while talking to ‘The News’.

Another issue in the case, to be taken up by the two-member bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan today (Thursday), was the approval of questionable layout plan of the Northern Strip of Sector E-11. The CDA Planning Wing should have prepared the layout plan. It was alleged that the then Director (Housing Societies) Ghulam Sarwar Sandhu was entrusted with the job.

However Ghulam Sarwar Sandhu, when contacted by ‘The News’, said under the agreement signed with the MPCHS, it was the MPCHS, which was supposed to prepare the layout plan and present it before the CDA Board. According to him, it was done accordingly.

He said that he had no role in this regard. When the layout plan was presented before the CDA Board meeting in which Member (Planning) Tanvir Bukhari, Member (Engineering) Tahir Shamshad and Member FA Saeed-ur-Rehman were present, it was vetted by the three-member committee comprising these senior board members of the CDA. “The CDA member (planning) should have pointed out flaws and shortcomings in the layout plan as he was present in the meeting and not me,” Sandhu said.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=193940