1. Mr. Muhammad Saleem Samo, learned Amicus Curiae, has pointed out that the petition has been kept pending only to decide the issue whether after the expiry of the Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance, 1979, K.B.C.A. Could still regularize unauthorized construction etc., as in the present matter.
2. In this regard Mr. Saleem Samo has submitted that the above mentioned Ordinance was promulgated on 19-3-2002 and expired on 18-3-2003 as per section 1(3) thereof. Admittedly, the respondent No.1 had applied for regularization of the building in question on 31-5-2002 during the life of the Ordinance. Consequently, per Article 264 of the Constitution which is synonymous with section 6 of the General Clauses Act, inter alia, any right/privilege/obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under any repealed enactment would servive. Hence, per learned amicus curiae the right of the respondent No.1 to have at least his application for regularization decided by KBCA in accordance with the then existing law would survive. In support of his submission, he has relied upon Jannat-ul-Haq v. Abbas Khan 2001 SCM R 1073.
3. All the other learned counsel concur with the submission made by the learned amicus curiae.
4. We have heard the learned amicus curiae and in our opinion he has cited the law correctly as enshrined in Article 264 of the Constitution and section 6 of the General Clauses Act, which provide inter alia, any right/privilege/obligation or liability acquired or incurred under a repealed enactment would survive notwithstanding the repeal. Admittedly, the Ordinance in question was promulgated on 19-3-2002 and expired on 18-3-2003 whereas the respondent No.1 applied for regularization on 31-5-2002. Consequently, we would dispose of this petition and direct the K.B.C.A.
5. To decide the respondent No.1's regularization application in accordance with law within one month from today and report compliance thereafter.