02-10-2009, 04:06 PM
PA concerned over blockade of roads by DHA
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
By Asim Hussain
LAHORE
THE Punjab Assembly on Monday expressed concern over the blocking of roads and access to localities adjoining the DHA Lahore by the DHA management, inconveniencing people.
The issue came up during Question Hour by a query from Mian Naseer Ahmad who sought explanation as to which authority had ordered the closure of roads in LDA revenue record.
Law Minister Rana Sanaullah responding on behalf of the minister for housing, civic development and public health engineering, said the LDA had not closed any of the roads in its revenue records.
The questioner indicated that according to Revenue Record, there were nineteen roads leading to the adjoining localities of DHA, of which six were closed down permanently while huge iron gates were erected on seven of them. The rest were open.
The law minister said if the roads mentioned were those leading through DHA limits, then the matter was not under the purview of Housing Department or the government of Punjab. He said the point raised by the questioner was valid.
The questioner, Mian Naseer Ahmad, asked if the issue did not concern the Punjab government then who would respond to this problem. He said DHA limits were also a part of Pakistan and no institution should be allowed to establish a ‘state within state’.
MPA Ghazala Rafiq said the issue raised by the questioner was a long standing problem of the people living in localities around the DHA and a number of complaints had been filed before the authorities in this regard in the last many years without any success in getting relief.
MPA Ali Ashgar Manda said according to law no authority, including the government, could close down any road or passage marked in the Revenue Records. He said the DHA management had violated the relevant law by closing down the access to adjoining localities.
Rana Sanaullah said sometimes serious security concerns prevailing these days made it necessary to take unusual measures and this matter could be taken up with the DHA, concerned MPAs and other departments to see if some violation of the laws was made.
Earlier, the law minister dispelled the concerns aired by some members regarding feared upsurge in the lawlessness in the province after the reported shifting of Nato supplies terminal from NWFP to Punjab. The concerns were raised by Col Shuja Khanzada on a point of order. He feared that anti American sentiments and activities of Taliban would increase in the province as a result of this decision which would cause deterioration of law and order.
The law minister, however, said the member’s concern was based only on newspaper reports and according to his knowledge no concrete decision had been made. He added that as a matter of policy, Pakistan should not have become a frontline state in the war of some other country. He regretted that the nation was now made to reap the crop of violence and war sowed by rulers during the last eight years. He said it was high time those elements should admit their blunders and tender apology to the nation.
Earlier, opposition members Mohsin Leghari, Mohammad Yar Hiraj and others drew the attention of the speaker to reverse his ruling regarding the admittance of an adjournment motion questioning the land purchase by Chaudhry Monis Elahi for debate on Tuesday.
Mohsin Leghari citing relevant clause 83 of the Rules of Business of Punjab Assembly, stated that no adjournment motion can be moved against the personal conduct of a member, except for actions taken in his official and public capacity. He said that motion could not be moved for a matter of the past or challenging some personal dealings of members. Some other opposition members joined them and termed the debate as victimization of Monis Elahi.
He asked the speaker to reverse his ruling to hold debate on the adjournment motion moved by Makhdoom Ahmad Mahmood but the speaker observed that the matter was not of his ruling but of the will of the House.
Rana Sanaullah informed the House that the motion was not admitted as a result of speaker’s ruling but with the majority vote of the House. He said at the time of tabling that adjournment motion or during the voting on it, the opposition members remained unconcerned. But now they were raising hue and cry for mere point scoring and to prove their loyalties to their leadership.
Mohsin Leghari and other opposition members stated that if the decision of holding a debate on the motion against Monis was not reversed then they should also be allowed to table adjournment motion against the purchase of lands by some top leaders of ruling party.
The speaker asked them to take up their issue after the Question Hour was over. But the opposition members staged a walk out when the House was briefly adjourned for Maghrib prayers complaining that they were not being allowed to table their adjournment motion against the ruling party leadership.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=161822
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
By Asim Hussain
LAHORE
THE Punjab Assembly on Monday expressed concern over the blocking of roads and access to localities adjoining the DHA Lahore by the DHA management, inconveniencing people.
The issue came up during Question Hour by a query from Mian Naseer Ahmad who sought explanation as to which authority had ordered the closure of roads in LDA revenue record.
Law Minister Rana Sanaullah responding on behalf of the minister for housing, civic development and public health engineering, said the LDA had not closed any of the roads in its revenue records.
The questioner indicated that according to Revenue Record, there were nineteen roads leading to the adjoining localities of DHA, of which six were closed down permanently while huge iron gates were erected on seven of them. The rest were open.
The law minister said if the roads mentioned were those leading through DHA limits, then the matter was not under the purview of Housing Department or the government of Punjab. He said the point raised by the questioner was valid.
The questioner, Mian Naseer Ahmad, asked if the issue did not concern the Punjab government then who would respond to this problem. He said DHA limits were also a part of Pakistan and no institution should be allowed to establish a ‘state within state’.
MPA Ghazala Rafiq said the issue raised by the questioner was a long standing problem of the people living in localities around the DHA and a number of complaints had been filed before the authorities in this regard in the last many years without any success in getting relief.
MPA Ali Ashgar Manda said according to law no authority, including the government, could close down any road or passage marked in the Revenue Records. He said the DHA management had violated the relevant law by closing down the access to adjoining localities.
Rana Sanaullah said sometimes serious security concerns prevailing these days made it necessary to take unusual measures and this matter could be taken up with the DHA, concerned MPAs and other departments to see if some violation of the laws was made.
Earlier, the law minister dispelled the concerns aired by some members regarding feared upsurge in the lawlessness in the province after the reported shifting of Nato supplies terminal from NWFP to Punjab. The concerns were raised by Col Shuja Khanzada on a point of order. He feared that anti American sentiments and activities of Taliban would increase in the province as a result of this decision which would cause deterioration of law and order.
The law minister, however, said the member’s concern was based only on newspaper reports and according to his knowledge no concrete decision had been made. He added that as a matter of policy, Pakistan should not have become a frontline state in the war of some other country. He regretted that the nation was now made to reap the crop of violence and war sowed by rulers during the last eight years. He said it was high time those elements should admit their blunders and tender apology to the nation.
Earlier, opposition members Mohsin Leghari, Mohammad Yar Hiraj and others drew the attention of the speaker to reverse his ruling regarding the admittance of an adjournment motion questioning the land purchase by Chaudhry Monis Elahi for debate on Tuesday.
Mohsin Leghari citing relevant clause 83 of the Rules of Business of Punjab Assembly, stated that no adjournment motion can be moved against the personal conduct of a member, except for actions taken in his official and public capacity. He said that motion could not be moved for a matter of the past or challenging some personal dealings of members. Some other opposition members joined them and termed the debate as victimization of Monis Elahi.
He asked the speaker to reverse his ruling to hold debate on the adjournment motion moved by Makhdoom Ahmad Mahmood but the speaker observed that the matter was not of his ruling but of the will of the House.
Rana Sanaullah informed the House that the motion was not admitted as a result of speaker’s ruling but with the majority vote of the House. He said at the time of tabling that adjournment motion or during the voting on it, the opposition members remained unconcerned. But now they were raising hue and cry for mere point scoring and to prove their loyalties to their leadership.
Mohsin Leghari and other opposition members stated that if the decision of holding a debate on the motion against Monis was not reversed then they should also be allowed to table adjournment motion against the purchase of lands by some top leaders of ruling party.
The speaker asked them to take up their issue after the Question Hour was over. But the opposition members staged a walk out when the House was briefly adjourned for Maghrib prayers complaining that they were not being allowed to table their adjournment motion against the ruling party leadership.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=161822