The Sindh High Court has directed civic authorities to ensure that no hazardous or dangerous material is stored within any residential area.
Disposing of a petition against the sealing of a solar panel showroom in the DHA area, an SHC division bench headed by Justice Adnan-Ul-Karim Memon observed that in case any such inflammable material is found, the authorities, in collaboration with the owner of the material, shall take immediate steps to have the same removed to a safe location so as to avert any untoward incident.
The court also directed the Sindh inspector general of police, along with the local administration, to ensure that all necessary precautionary and preventive measures are undertaken in this regard to safeguard public life and property.
Petitioner Faisal Hameed submitted that he is the sole proprietor of a private firm and engaged in the business of importing and selling solar panels and allied equipment.
The petitioner’s counsel submitted that his business premises were abruptly sealed by DHA authorities without prior notice, show-cause, lawful authority, or due process of law, in collusion with a private respondent with whom the petitioner has a pending commercial dispute.
He submitted that no provision under the Cantonments Act, 1924, authorizes the sealing of commercial premises and, therefore, the impugned action is without jurisdiction, mala fide, and violative of the petitioner’s fundamental rights guaranteed under articles 4, 9, 18, and 23 of the Constitution and requested court to order de-sealing of the office.
The respondents’ counsel submitted that the petitioner lacks locus standi and has suppressed material facts, particularly regarding the storage of lithium batteries in a bulk quantity at the premises without requisite safeguards, posing a serious fire hazard in a densely populated commercial area.
They submitted that a notice was issued on January 26 but not complied with, and the impugned action was undertaken in discharge of statutory duties under the Cantonments Act, 1924, as part of a fire-safety drive.
The court observed that it appears that the controversy primarily revolves around the alleged storage of lithium batteries and other potentially hazardous material at the subject premises situated in a residential/commercial locality.
It further observed that a public authority may take coercive action, such as sealing commercial premises, only where such power is expressly conferred by law and exercised in accordance with the prescribed procedure; otherwise, it amounts to an arbitrary exercise of power in violation of articles 4, 18, and 23 of the Constitution.
The high court observed that the respondents’ plea for a regulatory or a fire-safety drive does not dispense with strict compliance of statutory authority under the Cantonments Act, 1924, and in the absence of such express power, the impugned action may be termed ultra vires.
The court observed that the objection regarding the petitioner’s status on the municipal record raises disputed facts and does not justify bypassing mandatory legal procedure.
It observed that state functionaries are under a statutory obligation to ensure public safety and prevent any untoward incident arising out of the storage of inflammable or dangerous material, and such regulatory measures must also conform to the requirements of due process of law.
It further stated that it cannot be overlooked that storage of hazardous or inflammable material, if any, within a residential area without requisite safeguards, may pose a serious risk to life and property.
The court directed the petitioner to adopt all necessary precautions to prevent any mishap and ensure that any hazardous, inflammable, dangerous, and/or explosive material, if stored at the subject premises, is forthwith removed from the residential area to a safe and authorized location in accordance with applicable safety regulations.
The SHC also observed that the subject premises shall be de-sealed forthwith after compliance with the court order to enable the petitioner to carry on lawful business activities strictly in accordance with law.
It directed the officials to ensure no such hazardous or dangerous material is stored within any residential area in future. In case any such inflammable material is found, the authorities, in collaboration with the owner of the material, shall take immediate steps to have the same removed to a safe location so as to avert any untoward incident.
The court further said that its directions be strictly complied with by all concerned; failing which, appropriate proceedings shall be initiated against the delinquent officials in terms of Article 204 of the Constitution.
