KARACHI: In a dispute between the National Highway Authority (NHA) and the Sindh government over ownership of land constituting the right of way (RoW) along the M-9 motorway, the Sindh High Court has directed the provincial government to decide the entire controversy afresh within 45 days after providing all stakeholders an opportunity to be heard.

The SHC also ordered the competent authority of the Sindh government to examine the whole matter, including NHA’s claim about statutory control over the RoW, assertions about the concession agreement inked between NHA and a private firm, the impugned amendment and cancellation of mutation as well as the stance of private individuals and other authorities concerned.

A two-judge constitutional bench headed by Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon further said that apparently, the deliberations held between authorities concerned also indicated that the matter can appropriately be taken up by the competent authority upon a formal reference by the NHA.

The NHA had petitioned the SHC in 2017 against cancellation of mutation by the Sindh government as well as to reduce the limit of RoW and nullify mutation entries on the ground that they were done in violation of approval of competent authority and no payment was made by NHA.

Thereafter, SCORE, a private firm, which took over the motorway project in 2015 on a build-operate-and-transfer basis, had also approached the SHC and impugned a letter issued by the secretary land utilisation department Sindh in June 2017 about cancellation of permission/mutation of RoW as well as some provisions of laws on the highways.

The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned West Pakistan Highways (Sindh Amendment) Act 2018 and the impugned letter were without lawful authority and beyond provincial competence since under the concession agreement exclusive rights were granted to the private petitioner to develop, operate and commercially exploit the M-9 concession area, including its RoW for 25 years.

They also contended that M-9, being a national highway under the NHA Act, 1991 including its RoW, came within the federal domain and the province could neither legislate nor act contrary to federal law or subsisting concession.

However, an additional advocate general (AAG) Sindh argued that the subject land was provincial property and NHA, being a statutory authority and not the federation, could not acquire or claim title without lawful acquisition or transfer under Articles 152 and 173 (3) of the Constitution.

The AAG also maintained that NHA neither acquired the land nor paid any consideration and the mutation relied upon by it did not create or establish title and therefore, its cancellation by the province of Sindh was lawful.

At the outset of the hearing, the AAG filed a report in compliance with a previous order regarding meetings held with NHA’s officers concerned about RoW and mutation of the M-9 motorway’s land in favour of NHA.

It stated that NHA had agreed in the meeting held on Aug 6 to formally refer the matter to the government of Sindh for allotment and mutation of designated RoW land along with relevant documents, keeping in view historical approval and payment made under the chief minister’s directives issued in 2012.

The AAG sought a directive for NHA to move a reference as agreed in the meeting, but the lawyers for petitioners refuted the stance and said that their stance has not been taken in the subject meeting and therefore, they have made the suggestions to be incorporated in the order so that their stance may be considered by the competent authority.

An individual had also approached the SHC as intervener and submitted that he owned a commercial plot directly affected by Superhighway (M-9). However, the lawyers for petitioners rebutted it and contended that the assertion of the intervener about dimensions and construction on the Superhighway corridor and service road was not correct.

The bench in its order noted that without expressing any opinion on the merits and respective claims and contentions raised by the parties, it was of the view that the controversy concerning the ownership, allotment and mutation of the land constituting RoW along the M-9 required consideration by the competent authority of the Sindh government in accordance with law.

While disposing of the petitions, it remitted the matter to the competent authority of the provincial government with direction to consider the entire controversy afresh, afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to all stakeholders and pass a reasoned and speaking order dealing with each material contention and suggestion raised before it within 45 days.

The bench also said that until such decision was taken, the existing interim arrangement/status quo directed by the SHC shall remain intact.

Published in Dawn, September 26th, 2026