IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

W.P. No._____________/2001

1. Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan wife of Ahmad Yar Khan, R/o

287/B Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan.
2. Mst. Naseem Akhtar wife of R.N. Rahat Nawaz, R/o 536/D
Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan.
3. Haq Nawaz S/o Haji Nazar Muhammad, caste Arain, R/o 51
Block “F”, Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan
Petitioners
VERSUS
1. Multan Development Authority, through its Director General.
2. Director General, M.D.A.
3. Director, Estate & Land Management, M.D.A.
4. Rainbow International (Pvt.) Ltd. through its Managing Director
opposite Hyundai Multan Motors, L.M.Q. Road, Multan.
Respondents

Writ Petition under Article 199 of

the Constitution of Islamic
Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

Respectfully Sheweth: -
1. That the names and addresses of the parties have correctly been
given for the purpose of their summons and citations.
2. That the petitioners are residents of Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony,
which was proposed, designed, established and controlled by
respondents No. 1, 2 & 3.

3. That the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3, at the time of establishment

and designing of the said colony provided all civic facilities to
meet the requirement of future e.g. space for graveyard,
dispensaries, schools, parks, streets, roads, etc. At the time of
allotment, the price of these plots provided for civic facilities was
charged in the shape of development charges. This colony was
established about 20/22 years ago, but uptill now, no facilities are
provided completely. Even the roads and streets are incomplete in
that area.

4. That since last 15 years, due to the climatic effect, hygienic

problems, stress & tension and other prevailing circumstances,
the residents of this colony like in other area, are going to
become the victims of different diseases like diabetes,
hypertension and other heart problems. The walk is only
treatment which does not cost to anybody. In this situation, the
residents of this colony submitted appeals to the respondents No.
1, 2 & 3 and other Government functionaries. Ultimately, the
National Bank of Pakistan came forward and after spending
about one crore rupees, the Jinnah Park situated in this colony,
was organized, walk tracks were constructed and after making
other necessary arrangements, it was opened for walking and
recreation facilities of the residents of this colony. Since last 6/7
years, the residents of Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony are enjoying
the facility of this park.

5. That the residents of this colony were astonished when 3/4

months prior to this date, the respondent No. 4 started to destroy
the walk tracks, installation of some turbine and machinery,
construction and establishment of shops & Khokhas. The
petitioners and other residents of the colony tried to explore the
matter from the respondents, but could not succeed to get proper
 information. Anyhow, it disclosed to the petitioners and other
residents of the colony that the park is given to the respondent
No. 4 by the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 for the establishment of a
“Water Park”.

6. That one of the residents of this colony submitted an application

for certain copies of by-laws and other documents on 26.6.2001
to initiate the legal proceedings, but the same was refused vide
letter No. G-124/594/DTP/MDA dated 29.7.2001. The petitioners
and other residents of the colony submitted a
request/representation before the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3, but
there was no response to this request/representation. Copies of
application, letter and representation are Annexes “A , B & C”.

7. That the Director and Managing Director of respondent No. 4 are

very influential persons having deep roots with the civil
administration and bureaucracy, hurdled all the efforts of the
petitioners; looking no way for the redressal of their grievance an
application was submitted before the Hon’ble High Court, which
was entertained on 4.7.2001 by Madam Justice Mrs. Fakhar-un-
Nisa Khokhar, J. In this order, it was directed that a proper writ
petition be filed by any aggrieved person. Copies of application
and order are Annexes “D & E”.

8. That the subject of this application and order was published in

different newspapers on which the respondents established a
contact with some of the residents of the colony and assured that
the contract agreement between respondents No. 1 & 4 shall be
cancelled but under this plea, all the respondents accelerated the
work of installation required in respect of Water Park. Now it is
quite evident from the circumstances. The respondent No. 4 is
going to start the operation of this water park within next few
days.
9. That the act and action of commercialisation of a civic facility is
illegal, unlawful and ultra vires inter alia on the following
mentioned: -

GROUNDS

a) That the place/space, once earmark & for the public

facility/civic facility for the interest of general public
cannot be converted for any other purpose.

b) That the duty of respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 after

allotment, occupation and construction upon the plots
remain to organize the record and to look after the
colony. They are authorised to remove the
encroachments but certainly have no right to hand over
the property of the colony to some other without the
consent of the residents.

c) That the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 have charged the

price of this park including all the other facilities
provided in this colony, in the shape of development
charges.

d) That Rs. 10,000,000/- (one crore rupees) were spend to

construct the walk-way and grass the said plot by the
N.B.P. with the co-ordination and help of World Bank
and destruction of the same is a loss to the Government
exchequer.

e) That Pakistan now-a-days is in the crisis of shortage of

under-ground water and water level is going to be low.
This type of water-park in the residential area requires a
lot of water, which shall create a great problem for the
shortage of water to the residents of this colony.

f) That more than 150 houses including the houses of the

petitioners are around this water park. There are slides
 having height of more than 100 feet. The people will
enjoy in short wearing which will effect the sanctity of
“Chadar & Char Deewary”.

g) That the petitioners and residents of the colony shall be

deprived from the facility of walk and recreation for
which this park was meant at the time of establishment
of this colony.

10. That the petitioners and residents of this colony are left with
no other adequate, efficacious and speedy remedy except to
invoke the extra-ordinary constitutional jurisdiction of this
Hon’ble Court.

Keeping in view the above-mentioned facts, it is

respectfully prayed that: -

i) The act and action of respondents No. 1, 2 & 3

for the handing over the said park to respondent
No. 4 may please be declared as illegal, unlawful
and ultra-vires.

ii) The respondent No. 4 may please be directed to

remove all the installations of shops and all other
constructions in and around the said park.

iii) The respondent No. 4 may please be directed to

re-construct walk-ways and grass of the park at
his own cost.

iv) The respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 may please be

directed to restore the said park to the petitioners
and the residents of the colony for the purpose it
was ear-marked initially at the time of
establishment of this colony (walk & recreation).
 Any other writ, order, direction or relief which
this Hon’ble Court deems fit, may please be extended in
the favour of petitioners to meet the ends of justice.

Humble Petitioners,

Dated: ___________

Through: -
1. Abdul Aziz Khan Niazi,
Advocate Supreme Court,
District Courts, Multan.

2. Sheikh Muhammad
Faheem,
Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20176

3. Hammad Afzal Bajwa,

Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20959

CERTIFICATE: -
Certified as per instructions of the clients,
that this is the first petition on the subject
matter. No such petition has earlier been
filed before this Hon’ble Court.
Advocate
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

W.P. No. ______________/2001

Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc. Vs. M.D.A. etc.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Haq Nawaz S/o Haji Nazar Muhammad, caste Arain,
R/o 51 Block “F”, Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above-mentioned petition are true and correct
to the best of my knowledge and belief and
nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT

Verification: -
Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day
of August 2001 that the contents of this affidavit
are true & correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.

DEPONENT
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001

In
W.P. No.____________/2001

Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc. Vs. M.D.A. etc.

APPLICATION FOR DISPENSING WITH THE

FILING OF CERTIFIED COPIES OF ANNEXURES.
=========================================

Respectfully Sheweth:-
That certified copies of Annexures “A to F” are not
available. However, uncertified/photo state copies of the
same have been annexed with the petition, which are true
copies of original documents.
It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble
court may please dispense with the filing of aforesaid copies
of documents.
APPLICANTS
Dated: __________
Through: -
1. Abdul Aziz Khan Niazi,
Advocate Supreme Court,
District Courts, Multan.

2. Sheikh Muhammad Faheem,

Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20176

3. Hammad Afzal Bajwa,

Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20959
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001

In
W.P. No.____________/2001

Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc. Vs. M.D.A. etc.

DISPENSATION APPLICATION.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Haq Nawaz S/o Haji Nazar Muhammad, caste Arain,
R/o 51 Block “F”, Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above-mentioned application are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT

Verification: -
Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day
of August 2001 that the contents of this affidavit
are true & correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.
DEPONENT
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

W.P. No.____________/2001

Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc. Vs. M.D.A. etc.

INDEX

S. No. NAME OF DOCUMENTS ANNEXES PAGES

1 Urgent Form
2 Stamp Paper worth Rs. 500/- each.
3 Writ Petition.
4 Affidavit
5 Copies of application, letter & A, B & C
representation.
6 Copies of application and order. D&F
7 Dispensation Application.
8 Affidavit.
9 Application U/s 151 C.P.C.
10 Affidavit.
11 Vakalatnama

PETITIONERS
Dated: _________
Through: -
1. Abdul Aziz Khan Niazi,
Advocate Supreme Court,
District Courts, Multan.

2. Sheikh Muhammad Faheem,

Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20176
3. Hammad Afzal Bajwa,
Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20959
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001

In
W.P. No.____________/2001

Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc. Vs. M.D.A. etc.

STAY APPLICATION.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Haq Nawaz S/o Haji Nazar Muhammad, caste Arain,
R/o 51 Block “F”, Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Multan

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above-mentioned application are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT

Verification: -
Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day
of August 2001 that the contents of this affidavit
are true & correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.
DEPONENT
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001

In
W.P. No.____________/2001

Mst. Rashida Ahmad Khan etc. Vs. M.D.A. etc.

STAY APPLICATION.

Respectfully Sheweth: -
1. That the prima facie case of the petitioners is strong one and
there is every likelihood to be decided in favour of the
petitioners.

2. That the disputed park was ear-marked as a civic facility and the
status of the same cannot be changed with the sweet will of the
respondents.

3. That the petitioners and the other residents of the colony have
paid the price of this park in the shape of development charges.

4. That balance of convenience and balance of justice is in favour of

the petitioners.

5. That if the respondents shall start the operation of this water park,
the petitioners and the other residents of the colony shall face
irreparable loss.

In view of the above circumstances, it is

respectfully prayed that the respondents may please be
directed not start the operation of the said water park till
the final decision of the main petition.

Humble Petitioners,
Dated: _________

Through: -
1. Abdul Aziz Khan Niazi,
Advocate Supreme Court,
District Courts, Multan.

2. Sheikh Muhammad Faheem,

Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20176

3. Hammad Afzal Bajwa,

Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20959