Daily Times

ISLAMABAD: The case of Orange Line Metro Train (OLMT) will be heard by a new bench as one of the judges on the previous bench has recused to hear the case.

A day ago Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Saqib Nisar formed a five-member larger bench led by Justice Amir Hani Muslim to hear the case.

The other members are Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, Justice Azmat Saeed, Justice Umar Ata Bandial and Justice Ijazul Ahsan.

However, when the hearing started on Monday, Justice Amir Hani Muslim recused to hear the case observing that he has distanced himself from the bench due to personal reasons.

Lawyer for the Punjab Mass Transit Authority requested the bench to fix date to resume the hearing at earliest.

But Justice Amir Hani Muslim observed that date cannot be fixed as he is not hearing the case.

Now, the CJP will form a new bench. The case has been adjourned for an indefinite time.

The court has been hearing the case filed by the Punjab government against LHC’s verdict in which the high court had set aside no objection certificates (NOCs) for the project to stop the government from carrying out the construction within the 200-foot radius of 11 heritage sites.

The heritage sites include Supreme Court’s Lahore registry, St Andrew’s Presbyterian Church and Baba Mauj Darya Bukhari’s shrine, Shalimar Garden, Gulabi Bagh Gateway, Buddhu ka Awa, Chauburji, Zebunnisa’s Tomb, Lakshmi Building, General Post Office, Aiwan-i-Auqaf.

A larger bench headed by former chief justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali on October 14, 2016 formed a two-member commission to re-verify reports pertaining to environmental assessment keeping in view the impact on heritage sites after the completion of the project.

The commission comprised of international experts on technical modalities and preservation of heritage.

“After considering the background of the controversy involved in the present proceedings, we deem it appropriate to appoint Ms TYPSA-Asian Consulting Engineers (Pvt.) Ltd and Professor Robin Cunningham, Professor in the Department of Archeology, UNESCO, as commission of technical experts for re-verification of credibility of the NESPAK Reports dated July 2015 and February 2016 relied upon by the appellant (Punjab government), in the context of the Antiquities Act 1975 and Punjab Special Premises (Preservation) Ordinance 1985,” the court had ruled.

The commission has re-verified the environmental assessment reports separately prepared by the National Engineering Services Pakistan Ltd (NESPAK) and the Advisory Committee on the OLMT project.

However, NESPAK on December 26, 2016 objected to the committee’s findings, contending that one of the members Professor Robin Cunningham exceeded his domain and prepared the report beyond its scope.

NASPAK also contended that the professor’s findings focused on the interpretation and the applicability of the two statutes, including the Antiquities Act, 1975 and the Punjab Special Premises (Preservation) Ordinance, 1985 despite the fact that he is not a law expert.

NESPAK lawyer Ayesha Hamid filed a civil miscellaneous application, saying that the professor’s research is in archeological ethics and practice in cultural heritage and he is neither an expert in civil engineering (including structural engineering) nor an expert on law.

“Professor Cunningham self-evidently lacks the requisite expertise to re-verify the credibility of the NESPAK reports in the context of the Antiquities Act 1975 and the Punjab Special Premises (Preservation) Ordinance 1985,” stated a 19-page CMA.

This is also evident from the fact that he failed to discuss the SAP 2000 model, the dynamic analysis, the engineering data inputs and the calculation of vibrations on which the NESPAK reports are based, the application read. It also objected that even before discussing the NESPAK reports, Professor Cunningham conclusively stated that OLMT contravenes the Sections 22 and 23 of the Act of 1975 and Sections 11 and 12 of the Ordinance of 1985.