1. ' SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, J.---In both the abovementioned petitions, the grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent, Karachi Development Authority (K.D.A.) have carved out three commercial plots bearing Nos.SB.1 to SB.3 in front of Plots bearing Nos.FL.8 and FL.9 out of the area which was reserved for the purpose of water conduit line of Karachi Water Sewerage Board. The petitioners challenged the action of K.D.A. In two separate writ petitions alleging that the carving out of the commercial plots out of the area reserved for conduit water pipe has materially affected the rights of petitioners in the above petitions as at the time they acquired the properties they were given an understanding that Plot Nos.FL.8 and FL.9 are bounded on one side by 135 feet vide road and 60 feet wide open space reserved for conduit pipe. By carving out three commercial plots, the petitioners have not only been deprived of the open space of 60 feet for the conduit pipe in front of Plots Nos.FL.8 and FL.9 but that such an action of K.D.A. Is in complete violation of the Rules and Regulations governing the development of the area by the K.D.A. It is also contended that carving out of commercial plots out of the area reserved for open space for water conduit line is also violative of the Master Plan of the area prepared by K.D.A. Under the provisions of Karachi Development Authority Order, 1957.
2. ' The learned Judges of the Division Bench of High Court of Sindh, however, dismissed both the writ petitions on the ground that in so far the petitioners in Civil Petition No,301-K of 1994 are concerned, they racked necessary locus standi to challenge the transfer of new carved out Plots Nos.SB.1 to SB.3 by the K.D.A. And in so far the petitioner in Civil Petition No,203-K of 1994 was concerned, it could not challenge the transfer of these new carved out three plots as the petitioner has itself obtained extra land out of the area reserved for water conduit line from K.D.A. The learned Judges of High Court of Sindh also relied on a judgment of another Division Bench of that Court passed in Civil Petition No,D-1292 of 1988 in which the allotment of certain area out of conduit reservation/plots was challenged but without any success.
3. ' The learned counsel for the petitioners contended before us that the petitioner in Civil Petition No,203-K of 1995 had not obtained any allotment of land out of the area which was reserved for water conduit line in front of Plots Nos.FL.8 and FL.9. It is also contended by the learned counsel that the learned Judges could not dismiss the above petitions on the basis of facts of C.P.No,D-1292/88 in which neither the petitioners nor the private respondents were party. The learned counsel went on to urge that the action of K.D.A. In carving out plots out of the open area in front of the properties of the petitioner reserved for conduit water line, being in violation of the Master Plan of the area, the petitioner had the necessary locus standi to challenge the action of K.D.A. In view of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Mian Fazal Din v. Lahore Improvement Trust, Lahore (PLD 1969 SC 223). The above contentions inter alia require examination and we, accordingly, grant leave to appeal. The private respondents in the above petitions agitated that the petitioner in Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No,203-K of 1995 had also obtained allotment of land from K.D.A. Out of the area reserved for water conduit line. If it is so, the respondents will be at liberty to question the validity of such allotment/transfer of land by K.D.A. In favour of petitioner in Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No,203-K of 1995 at the time of hearing of appeals. The interim order passed by this Court earlier will remain operative until disposal of the appeals. As the nterim order is operating against the petitioners as well as the respondents, we direct that the appeals may be fixed for hearing at an early date. There is also an application for drawing contempt proceedings against K.D.A. Today the counsel for K.D.A. Has filed reply to the above application. This application will also be heard alongwith the appeals.