1. This petition was entertained for consideration on the ground, inter alia, that it was alleged that open space in .The vicinity of residence of petitioner, plots Nos, 1030 to 1032 (which numbers were not mentioned in the petition) which was claimed to be reserved for park and is being used for purpose other than for which it was reserved in the scheme. Several hearings have taken place, on directions of the Court. Respondents have filed their respective replies and pursuant to directions of the Court, Respondent No 4 Project Director Lines Areas Re-development Project has filed layout plan of the reorganized and redeveloped Lines Area project. According, to the respondent, open space which is claimed by the petitioner to be reserved for park, was in fact comprised of 135 sq. Yds. Consisting of three plots measuring 45 sq. Yrds. Each, carved out on the open space obtained after redevelopment and reorganization of the Lines Area. It is stated by Mr. A.I Bin Adam Jafri learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 that after reorganization, certain open space were left out which were for future use and for rehabilitation of the affectees of the Lines Area on account of expansion of the road and streets. As and when such expansion of street and road is carried out any person or property effected thereby is rehabilitated over such open space. It is stated that in the scheme parks and other amenity facility are clearly earmarked and those are preserved and protected and there has been no conversion and/or utilization of amenity plot other than the purpose it is earmarked. .
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner when confronted to the above, has drawn our attention to the letter dated 28.5.2009 of U.C. Nazim Union Council No 6 Jamshed Town, Karachi attached to his C.M.A. No. 9173/2009, which was filed after a period of almost 2 years from the date of filing instant petition, wherein it is stated that it was reserved for park but there is no other supporting documents except bald statement Learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 states that subject plot measuring 45 sq. Yrds. Each were allotted to previous allottee, which he acquired through registered conveyance from the original allottee Nazaruddin son of Sharfuddin.
3. Under the given facts and circumstances,? We 'are not persuaded to interfere in such allotment.
4. Accordingly petition is dismissed alongwith all pending applications, .