' SYED ABDUR REHMAN, J.--This is a petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islaimc Rupublic of Pakistan with the following prayer: "This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents or any person working under them:
(a) Not to demolish the compound wall and not to carve out 16 ft. Wide road from the Plot No,38-G- I, P.E.C.H.S., Karachi, without due process of law;
(b) Not to interefere with the petitioner's peaceful possession of the plot which is subject-matter of litigation before this Hon'ble Court:
(c) Cost of the petition be awarded to the Petitioner; and
(d) Any other relief deemed fit may also be granted."
2. The petitioner claims to be the owner of Plot No,38-G-I, Block VI, P.E.C.H., Karachi. He is in possession of the above plot and had constructed compound wall and ground floor portion thereon. Respondent No,4 was granted permission to construct a Film Auditorium by K.DA. In the Hill Park area with approach roads also from the Hill Park, but subsequently this permission was cancelled. It is alleged that the respondent No,4 with the active connivance of some officers of K.M.C. And K.D.A. Is trying to revive the Film Auditorium project and for approach roads, they want to deprive the petitioner of 16 ft. Wide strip/portion on his plot. Instead of taking any step according to law the respondents, it is further alleged, are trying to demolish the compound wall of the plot and carve out a road thereon forcibly. The respondents have neither issued any show-cause notice nor have they taken any other proceedings as required under the law before taking such action. Hence this petition.
3. In their counter-affidavit respondents Nos.2 and 3 have besides taking objections to the maintainability of the petition for want of statutory notice and the validity of the allotment made to the petitioner on the ground that the plot was portion of an amenity plot, have stated in paras 12 and 13 as under:-- "12. That the contents of para 8 of the petition as stated are denied. The answering_respondent as stated hcreinabove, shall take action against the petitioner only after serving notice as per law and rules, Moreover, in the approved plan there is no provision of 16 feet wide road approaching the plot of respondent No,4 as such, the question of carving out 16 feet wide road does not arise and any permission by the K.D.A. After 1972 is without a legal sanction.
13. That in reply to para 9 of the petition, it is stated that the answering respondent have not taken any action for removal of the encroachment nor any notice as yet been issued to the petitioner, No action without notice shall be taken against the petitioner."
4. Respondent No,4 has also filed a counter-affidavit in which he has not taken a stand different from that of the respondents Nos.2 and 3. He has, however, stated that the portion on which the road was to be constructed permission was granted to him by the K.D.A. To construct a road and he had already taken steps in that behalf.
5. We have heard Mr. Abdul Mujeeb Pirzada for the petitioner. Mr. S.H. Qazilbash for respondent No,1 and Mr. Iqbal Kazi for respondents Nos.2 and 3. All of them are of the clear view that no action can be taken by the respondents Nos.1 to 3 for demolition of the compound wall or taking over of the 16 ft. Wide strip/portion of the petitioner's plot, without notice or acquisition proceedings or such other proceedings as are necessary according to law. We, therefore, allow the petition and direct the respondents not to take any action for demolition of compound wall and not to carve out the 16 ft.
Wide strip/portion from the petitioner's plot without due process of law and without giving him notice. This is without prejudice to the rights of the respondents to take contentions which are available to them. Petition stands disposed of.