What's new

A tale of two towers

muhammadhafeezmalik

FULL MEMBER
Jan 21, 2015
1,575
-6
1,393
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
A tale of two towers

The plot was allotted to M/s BNP for the construction of Grand Hyatt Hotel but it instead built 40-storeyed luxury apartments complex

1637828676170.png

Combo shows Islamabad's Grand Hyatt Hotel (L) and Karachi's Nasla Tower.


Three years apart, two high-rise buildings in Islamabad and Karachi -- Grand Hyatt Hotel and Nasla Tower -- have met different fates when dealt with by the Supreme Court of Pakistan.



In January 2019, a three-member bench, headed by the then-Chief Justice Saqib Nisar, restored the lease of the Grand Hyatt Hotel, which was cancelled by the Capital Development Authority over violations of by-laws. The plot was allotted to M/s BNP for the construction of Grand Hyatt Hotel but it instead built 40-storeyed luxury apartments complex, converting the green areas into residential-cum-commercial areas. The apartments were sold to high-profile buyers like Prime Minister Imran Khan, former chief justice Nasir-ul-Mulk and others. M/s BNP is owned by Abdul Hafeez Pasha, a close friend of Imran Khan.

1637828762495.png

The bench directed the restoration of the lease through a short order issueda week before the retirement of Justice Saqib Nisar. A penalty of Rs18 billion was imposed on M/s BNP without applying any method of determination. Saqib Nisar then famously said he had a dream about this amount of penalty. Dismissing the plea of CDA, the former CJP questioned that if the CDA was sleeping for 13 years. Now, when two towers have been built, the authority is saying they fall within the Margalla Hills National Park area [where residential apartments couldn’t be built] and should be demolished, he remarked.


“The Supreme Court’s building and the Secretariat also fall in the area; shall those be demolished too?” he questioned and said people have now bought apartments. He went on to declare that half of Islamabad was built wrongly. Many wondered that they would come to know the wisdom behind this decision of restoration of the lease once the detailed verdict is issued. More than three years on, a detailed verdict on the restoration of lease has not been issued. Meanwhile, the CDA negotiated a mode of payment with the developer in the light of the short order.
1637828971639.png

Three years later, an SC bench, headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed Khan, ordered the demolition of 15-storeyed Nasla Tower in Karachi and directed refunding the amount to the buyers of residential and commercial units. The bench in its judgment said: “After examining the entire record and scrutinizing the reports submitted by all concerned agencies and departments, we are in no manner of doubt that the tower in question (Nasla Tower) has indeed been constructed on encroached land, which amongst other things has also blocked a service road.” While many people hailed the Nasla Tower verdict suggesting that it sent a loud and clear message to the real estate developers that violation will not be tolerated, they were also critical of the verdict delivered by Justice Saqib Nisar.

Other two members of the bench dealing with Nasla Tower case were Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin. Incidentally, Justice Ahsan was also a part of the bench which restored the lease of the Grand Hyatt Hotel. The CDA then raised objections on Justice Ahsan's inclusion in the bench, citing his previous association with M/s BNP as their lawyer. Then chief justice and head of the bench, Saqib Nisar, however, dismissed the objection, saying that Justice Ahsan's previous association with M/s BNP had no bearing on the case under question.

As for M/s BNP, it was set up shortly before it participated in the auction of the plot for the Grand Hyatt Hotel in 2005. Earlier, it had three partners who later quarrelled and now Pasha is its sole owner. Background discussions with CDA officials and lawyers remained engaged with CDA in this case suggest that it has made only payment of Rs1 billion, that too in 2012. The payment was rescheduled a couple of times before the lease was cancelled in 2016. When the SC restored the lease, mode of payment was negotiated again and the first installment under that agreement is yet to be paid, which is due in January 2022.



 

Sainthood 101

SENIOR MEMBER
Jul 24, 2021
2,984
-2
3,145
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Islamabad one was considered a security threat
Karachi one was an illegal construction on illegal land
 

Mav3rick

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 4, 2008
6,073
10
4,432
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
What do you think the judge should do? Let all illegal buildings stand?
The Court decisions should be rational, logical as well as legal. Those who had bought the apartments at NASLA tower and had the apartments leased were at no fault and hence should have been provided with market based compensation at least 6 months before eviction so that they could have found alternate accommodations. However, they have yet to be paid and hence they are the biggest losers whereas the builder has not paid a penny yet and is still scot-free.

Infact, logically, the Building should have been regularized as it had not only been built, completed and handed over but was also occupied by residents. The court could just as easily have fined the builder heavily for illegal encroaching of state land like that of Bahria Town Karachi. Alternatively, Engineering firms could have been hired to determine the possibility of alterations to the building in a manner in which illegal encroachments were minimized........or the unused encroached service lane could have been alternated with a small underpass etc.

Most importantly, the SC should have severely punished the departments which are responsible to ensure that no Government land is encroached upon as NASLA tower could not have been built without connivance. However, not a single soul has been punished.

The crux of the matter is that only the public has been punished for buying KDA/KBCA etc., approved properties which is a severe discharge of injustice. Nobody has been compensated, just as nobody was compensated at Alladin Park (400+ shops were demolished along with PavilionEnd Club). All those shops were providing livelihood to thousands and could just as easily have been regularized.
 

313ghazi

ELITE MEMBER
Mar 14, 2017
10,253
40
21,169
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
The Court decisions should be rational, logical as well as legal. Those who had bought the apartments at NASLA tower and had the apartments leased were at no fault and hence should have been provided with market based compensation at least 6 months before eviction so that they could have found alternate accommodations. However, they have yet to be paid and hence they are the biggest losers whereas the builder has not paid a penny yet and is still scot-free.

Infact, logically, the Building should have been regularized as it had not only been built, completed and handed over but was also occupied by residents. The court could just as easily have fined the builder heavily for illegal encroaching of state land like that of Bahria Town Karachi. Alternatively, Engineering firms could have been hired to determine the possibility of alterations to the building in a manner in which illegal encroachments were minimized........or the unused encroached service lane could have been alternated with a small underpass etc.

Most importantly, the SC should have severely punished the departments which are responsible to ensure that no Government land is encroached upon as NASLA tower could not have been built without connivance. However, not a single soul has been punished.

The crux of the matter is that only the public has been punished for buying KDA/KBCA etc., approved properties which is a severe discharge of injustice. Nobody has been compensated, just as nobody was compensated at Alladin Park (400+ shops were demolished along with PavilionEnd Club). All those shops were providing livelihood to thousands and could just as easily have been regularized.
Thats terrible. I had no idea the residents have not been compensated.
 

Ahmet Pasha

BANNED
May 23, 2017
10,071
-5
10,344
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
A tale of two towers

The plot was allotted to M/s BNP for the construction of Grand Hyatt Hotel but it instead built 40-storeyed luxury apartments complex

View attachment 796495
Combo shows Islamabad's Grand Hyatt Hotel (L) and Karachi's Nasla Tower.


Three years apart, two high-rise buildings in Islamabad and Karachi -- Grand Hyatt Hotel and Nasla Tower -- have met different fates when dealt with by the Supreme Court of Pakistan.



In January 2019, a three-member bench, headed by the then-Chief Justice Saqib Nisar, restored the lease of the Grand Hyatt Hotel, which was cancelled by the Capital Development Authority over violations of by-laws. The plot was allotted to M/s BNP for the construction of Grand Hyatt Hotel but it instead built 40-storeyed luxury apartments complex, converting the green areas into residential-cum-commercial areas. The apartments were sold to high-profile buyers like Prime Minister Imran Khan, former chief justice Nasir-ul-Mulk and others. M/s BNP is owned by Abdul Hafeez Pasha, a close friend of Imran Khan.

View attachment 796496
The bench directed the restoration of the lease through a short order issueda week before the retirement of Justice Saqib Nisar. A penalty of Rs18 billion was imposed on M/s BNP without applying any method of determination. Saqib Nisar then famously said he had a dream about this amount of penalty. Dismissing the plea of CDA, the former CJP questioned that if the CDA was sleeping for 13 years. Now, when two towers have been built, the authority is saying they fall within the Margalla Hills National Park area [where residential apartments couldn’t be built] and should be demolished, he remarked.


“The Supreme Court’s building and the Secretariat also fall in the area; shall those be demolished too?” he questioned and said people have now bought apartments. He went on to declare that half of Islamabad was built wrongly. Many wondered that they would come to know the wisdom behind this decision of restoration of the lease once the detailed verdict is issued. More than three years on, a detailed verdict on the restoration of lease has not been issued. Meanwhile, the CDA negotiated a mode of payment with the developer in the light of the short order.
View attachment 796497
Three years later, an SC bench, headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed Khan, ordered the demolition of 15-storeyed Nasla Tower in Karachi and directed refunding the amount to the buyers of residential and commercial units. The bench in its judgment said: “After examining the entire record and scrutinizing the reports submitted by all concerned agencies and departments, we are in no manner of doubt that the tower in question (Nasla Tower) has indeed been constructed on encroached land, which amongst other things has also blocked a service road.” While many people hailed the Nasla Tower verdict suggesting that it sent a loud and clear message to the real estate developers that violation will not be tolerated, they were also critical of the verdict delivered by Justice Saqib Nisar.

Other two members of the bench dealing with Nasla Tower case were Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin. Incidentally, Justice Ahsan was also a part of the bench which restored the lease of the Grand Hyatt Hotel. The CDA then raised objections on Justice Ahsan's inclusion in the bench, citing his previous association with M/s BNP as their lawyer. Then chief justice and head of the bench, Saqib Nisar, however, dismissed the objection, saying that Justice Ahsan's previous association with M/s BNP had no bearing on the case under question.

As for M/s BNP, it was set up shortly before it participated in the auction of the plot for the Grand Hyatt Hotel in 2005. Earlier, it had three partners who later quarrelled and now Pasha is its sole owner. Background discussions with CDA officials and lawyers remained engaged with CDA in this case suggest that it has made only payment of Rs1 billion, that too in 2012. The payment was rescheduled a couple of times before the lease was cancelled in 2016. When the SC restored the lease, mode of payment was negotiated again and the first installment under that agreement is yet to be paid, which is due in January 2022.



Where is eye of Sauron when you need it?
Look Gandalf the Yellow just arrived
327957_537729_updates.jpg


Seems to be missing his staff tho🤔
 

AZ1

SENIOR MEMBER
Jul 25, 2017
7,069
-2
6,932
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The Court decisions should be rational, logical as well as legal. Those who had bought the apartments at NASLA tower and had the apartments leased were at no fault and hence should have been provided with market based compensation at least 6 months before eviction so that they could have found alternate accommodations. However, they have yet to be paid and hence they are the biggest losers whereas the builder has not paid a penny yet and is still scot-free.

Infact, logically, the Building should have been regularized as it had not only been built, completed and handed over but was also occupied by residents. The court could just as easily have fined the builder heavily for illegal encroaching of state land like that of Bahria Town Karachi. Alternatively, Engineering firms could have been hired to determine the possibility of alterations to the building in a manner in which illegal encroachments were minimized........or the unused encroached service lane could have been alternated with a small underpass etc.

Most importantly, the SC should have severely punished the departments which are responsible to ensure that no Government land is encroached upon as NASLA tower could not have been built without connivance. However, not a single soul has been punished.

The crux of the matter is that only the public has been punished for buying KDA/KBCA etc., approved properties which is a severe discharge of injustice. Nobody has been compensated, just as nobody was compensated at Alladin Park (400+ shops were demolished along with PavilionEnd Club). All those shops were providing livelihood to thousands and could just as easily have been regularized.
Why PPP allow these illegal activity to happen? people buy and then suffer and then ppp play politics.

Lots of illegal building been made still making regardless of court order.

People of area, protesting, placing banner, wall chalking not to buy but ppl still buying knowingly its illegal.


IMG-20211125-WA0006.jpg
IMG-20211123-WA0030.jpg
IMG-20211104-WA0023.jpg
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom