SC asks Metro Train Project parties to file objections within three weeks

The Supreme Court Wednesday asked the parties of Orange Line Metro Train (OLMT) Project case to examine the expert reports on the environmental aspects of the project and file objections by the first week of January 2017. On August 19, the Lahore High Court (LHC) stayed the construction work of OLMT in the 200-metre radius of 11 heritage sites, protected under the Punjab Special Premises (Preservation) Ordinance, 1985 and the Antiquity Act, 1975.
Granting leave to appeal to the Punjab Mass Transit Authority and others on September 26, the Supreme Court formed a five-member larger bench to examine the contours of the Lahore High Court's verdict in the matter. On October 13, the larger bench led by Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali constituted a commission of technical experts comprising a member from TYPSA, Asia Consulting Engineers (Pvt) Ltd, and Professor Robin Cunningham, UNESCO Professor in department of archaeology, University of Durham, UK, with directives to re-verify credibility of NESPAK reports of July 2015 and February 2016 in context of Antiquities Act, 1975 and Punjab Special Premises (Preservation) Ordinance, 1985.
Submitting their reports on December 01 with the Supreme Court, the technical experts completely differed from the findings of NESPAK about construction of the OLMT Project, Lahore.
The findings of TYPSA Consulting Engineering said that the NESPAK reports seemed to be very serious and complete from structural point of view. The findings disclosed that approach adopted by NESPAK was conservative that gives vibrations/velocities higher than actual.
The TYPSA report stated, "The NESPAK reports rightly conclude that the levels obtained by calculation will be within the permissible limits and there will be no adverse effect on any of these sites." It concluded that the reports of NESPAK were compliant with the international codes and standards.
Professor Robin's report was that both NESPAK reports had significant failings and oversights in the context of Antiquities Act, 1975 and the Punjab Special Premises (Preservation) Ordinance, 1985. It strongly recommended that their failing be mitigated by the urgent commissioning of comprehensive and credible inter-disciplinary heritage impact assessment.
The report added that the Lahore Orange Metro Train route clearly contravenes clause 22 of the Antiquities Act, 1975 and clause 11 of Punjab Special Premises (Preservation) Ordinance, 1985 as its execution evidently represents a development scheme and involves new constructions with 200 feet of the 5 immovable antiquities, which are protected under the Act and the Ordinance.
On Wednesday, resuming the hearing of the matter, the larger bench under Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali asked all the parties of the case to examine the experts' reports and submit their objections, if any, on the next date of hearing. Later, hearing of the matter was adjourned till first week of January 2017.