Find a Lawyer

SAAD MAZHAR versus CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

The Articles 184 (3), 9, 14, 15, 23 and 24 of the Supreme Court under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution were dismissed by the residents of the towers in the federal capital because it appears to have caused damage to the buildings. Caused by damage. Due to the earthquake, due to non-standard construction under the supervision of the Capital Development Authority, towers, therefore, it was the legal responsibility of the capital development authority to provide them alternative housing, buildings, which were vacant. , Construction or some other arrangements were made by the Supreme Court. As a result of this opinion, the constitutional application included a substantial question of public importance regarding the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution under Arts 9, 14, 15, 23 and 24. Is. The decision to appeal the decision is pending, the Capital Development Authority should temporarily provide housing for displaced families. On the towers, renting the residence on an equal footing with the houses they live in, and if that was not possible, then a committee would be formed that would, within a three-day period, work on the monthly rent for each residence. ? , Which will be paid to them, so that they can manage their accommodation. The Capital Development Authority was prevented from transferring / destroying plots of damaged towers in any way, and the Capital Development Authority was also directed to own both of the building's towers. File a complete record. And plots, to indicate whether monopoly rights or plot ownership were granted to builders for the purpose of enhancing construction, as well as the approved authority's approved plans and immigration advocates email from Mian Chunnu lawyer