DCO restrained from constructing house near airport

PESHAWAR, Dec 11:The district coordination officer (DCO) of Chitral has been directed to stop constriction of a house close to the runway of the Chitral airport. In this regard, a senior civil judge in Chitral has vacated a stay order earlier granted to the DCO allowing him to continue with the construction of the house. The DCO had filed a civil suit with the court of senior civil judge (aala ilaqa qazi) a few months back,  challenging a show-cause notice issued to him by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). He had also filed an application seeking a stay order against the notice issued to him by the CAA till final disposal of the case. The court now directed him to restrain from continuing with the controversial construction. However, he can approach the CAA for getting a proper no objection certificate. The court also directed the CAA to make technical inspection of the danger zone of the airport and after complete examination it should declare the permissible limits of construction of buildings near the danger zone. The CAA should make the technical examination and evolve a policy within six months and declare permissible limit once for all so that such like controversies should not emerge in future. The CAA had served the controversial notice on the DCO in June this year. The CAA claimed that the controversial construction work was going on hardly 200 feet away from the centreline of the runway, whereas under the law around 750 feet on either side of the runway should always remain clear. The CAA also claimed that a pilot had filed a complaint against the construction. The DCO’s counsel contended that he was the owner of the land and he did not require any no-objection certificate from the CAA. He pointed out that several buildings had already been constructed in the same area and the CAA had either issued them NOC or it remained silent over that construction. He added that the attitude of CAA was discriminatory towards the plaintiff. The CAA was represented by its senior legal advisor Obaidur Rehman Abbasi and advocate Sajidullah. The court had also constituted a commission for looking into several aspects of the case including whether the construction would pose threat to landing and taking off of airplanes; and whether other constructions were made in the area. The said commission had reported that the controversial construction was within the danger zone, but some other buildings had already been constructed there. The commission observed that when other persons were allowed constructions then why not the plaintiff construct a house there.]]>