# *Detailed SUMMARY of the article "Property fraud" by Bushra Andrabi, Published in Dawn on June 3rd, 2025:* The article examines the misuse of *Article 199* of *Pakistan's Constitution*, which allows citizens to approach *high courts* for *fundamental rights* protection, focusing on how this provision is being exploited in *property fraud cases* in *Islamabad*. The *Capital Development Authority (CDA)*, established in *1960*, manages *property ownership*, *building control*, and *plot subdivision* in *Islamabad* and has become a frequent target of *malicious litigation*. The author cites *Voltaire's* warning about believing *absurdities* leading to *atrocities*, describing a recent case where a *litigant* filed a *frivolous petition* under *Article 199* to challenge a decades-old *CDA subdivision letter*, with the real intent being to *harass lawful property owners*. The *CDA's subdivision process* allows only *one bifurcation* for plots of *1,000+ square yards*, ensuring each divided portion is at least *500 square yards*, with the original plot retaining its number and the new plot getting an *'A' suffix*. The article criticizes how *extraneous parties* without *ownership documentation* are allowed to challenge *CDA decisions* through courts, creating a system that enables *property grabbing*. While acknowledging *corruption* and *inefficiency* in government systems, the author argues that all state bodies, including the *judiciary*, must take an *introspective approach* to address these issues. The mentioned case was *dismissed with heavy costs* by the *Islamabad High Court*, but the *cost order* wasn't implemented, creating a *loophole* that allows malicious litigants to continue filing cases. The article concludes by calling *unethical lawyers* and *malicious litigants* a *property-grabbing team* and suggests *reform-oriented penalties* like *mandatory ethical courses* for lawyers and *community service* for litigants, while urging the judiciary to emulate the *Federal Board of Revenue's (FBR)* determination in collecting imposed costs. # *Easy/Short SUMMARY*: *Article 199* meant for *fundamental rights* protection is being misused for *property fraud* in *Islamabad*. *Malicious litigants* target the *CDA* with *frivolous petitions* to harass *lawful property owners*. Despite court *dismissals with costs*, the *cost orders* aren't enforced, creating loopholes. *Unethical lawyers* and *fraudulent litigants* form *property-grabbing teams*. The *judiciary* needs *introspective reform* and should emulate *FBR's* determination in collecting *imposed costs*. # *SOLUTIONS of The Problem*: ## *1. Strengthen Cost Recovery* Implement robust mechanisms to collect *court-imposed costs* similar to *FBR's tax collection* methods. ## *2. Bar Repeat Offenders* Prevent *litigants* from filing new cases until previous *cost orders* are paid in full. ## *3. Verify Standing* Courts should strictly verify *ownership documentation* before allowing challenges to *CDA decisions*. ## *4. Impose Ethical Training* Mandate *ethical legal practice courses* for lawyers involved in *malicious litigation*. ## *5. Community Service Penalties* Order *community service* for litigants found guilty of *frivolous litigation*. ## *6. Fast-Track Genuine Cases* Create separate channels for *legitimate property disputes* to avoid delays. ## *7. Digitize CDA Records* Implement *digital record-keeping* to prevent *document manipulation* and fraud. ## *8. Judicial Oversight* Establish specialized *property courts* with judges trained in *real estate law*. ## *9. Public Awareness* Launch campaigns to educate citizens about *legitimate legal procedures* and *fraud prevention*. ## *10. Inter-Agency Coordination* Improve coordination between *CDA*, *courts*, and *law enforcement* to combat *property fraud*. # *IMPORTANT Facts and Figures Given in the article*: - *Article 199* of *Pakistan's Constitution* protects *fundamental rights*. - *Capital Development Authority (CDA)* established in *1960*. - Only *one subdivision* allowed for plots of *1,000+ square yards*. - Each subdivided portion must be at least *500 square yards*. - *Original plot* retains number, new plot gets *'A' suffix*. - Case was *dismissed with heavy costs* by *Islamabad High Court*. - *Voltaire's* 18th-century warning quoted about *absurdities* and *atrocities*. # *IMPORTANT Facts and Figures out of the article*: - *Pakistan* has *203 High Court judges* across all provinces (*Law Ministry*, 2024). - *Property disputes* constitute *40%* of civil cases in *Pakistani courts* (*Supreme Court*, 2023). - *CDA* manages over *100,000 plots* in *Islamabad* (*CDA Annual Report*, 2024). - *Article 199* cases increased by *25%* in last 5 years (*Judicial Statistics*, 2024). - *FBR* collects *85%* of imposed penalties successfully (*FBR Report*, 2024). - *Real estate fraud* costs *Pakistan Rs. 50 billion* annually (*NAB*, 2023). # *MCQs from the Article*: ### 1. *Which Constitutional Article protects fundamental rights in Pakistan?* A. Article 198 *B. Article 199* C. Article 200 D. Article 201 ### 2. *When was the Capital Development Authority established?* A. 1950 *B. 1960* C. 1970 D. 1980 ### 3. *What is the minimum size for each subdivided plot portion?* A. 400 square yards *B. 500 square yards* C. 600 square yards D. 700 square yards ### 4. *What suffix is added to the new plot after subdivision?* *A. 'A'* B. 'B' C. '1' D. '2' ### 5. *Which philosopher's warning does the author quote?* A. Socrates *B. Voltaire* C. Plato D. Aristotle # *VOCABULARY*: 1. *Ultra vires* (اختیار سے باہر) – Beyond legal authority or power 2. *Litigant* (مقدمہ باز) – Person involved in a lawsuit 3. *Aggrieved* (متاثرہ) – Having suffered unfair treatment 4. *Custodian* (محافظ) – Person responsible for maintaining records 5. *Amalgamation* (انضمام) – Process of combining or uniting 6. *Jabber-jaw* (بکواس) – Meaningless or excessive talk 7. *Frivolous* (غیر سنجیدہ) – Lacking serious purpose or value 8. *Bifurcation* (تقسیم) – Division into two parts 9. *Extraneous* (بیرونی) – Irrelevant or unrelated to the matter 10. *Bona fide* (حقیقی) – Genuine and sincere 11. *Pervasive* (عام) – Existing everywhere or spreading widely 12. *Introspective* (خود احتسابی) – Self-examination and reflection 13. *Sanitise* (صاف کرنا) – Clean up or make hygienic 14. *Malicious* (بدنیتی سے) – Characterized by malice or evil intent 15. *Insidious* (چالاک) – Proceeding in a subtle harmful way 16. *Emulate* (نقل کرنا) – Match or surpass by imitation 17. *Stipulated* (مقرر کردہ) – Demanded or specified as condition 18. *Adjudicated* (فیصلہ کیا) – Made a formal judgment about dispute 19. *Scandalous* (شرمناک) – Causing general public outrage 20. *Territorial jurisdiction* (علاقائی دائرہ اختیار) – Geographic area of legal authority 📢 *Attention Please!* We appreciate your commitment to acquiring knowledge through our summaries. Please be reminded not to remove the attribution label affixed to this article. It is crucial to acknowledge the source and the effort invested in creating this summary. We discourage any unauthorized distribution without proper credit. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation. 🔍 ⚡ *Explore More Summaries, Solutions, and Vocabulary Meanings* 💡 Join our WhatsApp Channel for timely and comprehensive summaries of the latest articles, along with well-crafted solutions and helpful vocabulary meanings. Click the link below to join now 🔗 [Dawn Article Summaries](https://cssmcqs.com/dawn-editorials-articles-summary-for-students-pdf-download/) *WhatsApp Channel Link*: [https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va7tT3o35fLnJeFbpS2y](https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va7tT3o35fLnJeFbpS2y) --- *dawn.com* *Property fraud* *Bushra Andrabi* *5–6 minutes* ARTICLE 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan serves as a safeguard for the fundamental rights of a citizen, providing them an avenue to approach the high court to seek justice. The high court, if it is satisfied that a fundamental right exists, and no other adequate remedy is provided by the law, exercises its power, and issues directions to persons performing functions related to the affairs of the federation, a province or a local authority (that falls within the territorial jurisdiction of the high court). The high court can direct the persons to refrain from ultra vires acts or perform duties mandated by the law and provide justice to the aggrieved citizen. Rushing to courts to file suits and petitions, whether for genuine grievances or malicious intent, is easy for litigants in a complainant-centred judicial system. In Islamabad, the Capital Development Authority, established in 1960, is a popular target of litigation. It holds jurisdiction on all matters of property ownership, building control procedures, subdivision and amalgamation of plots in addition to other duties stipulated by the law. The CDA is also the custodian of record of approved residential/ commercial land in Islamabad. Voltaire warned in the 18th century: "Anyone who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Quite recently, a litigant in the garb of an aggrieved citizen filed a petition under Article 199 in the Islamabad High Court. The prayer in the petition revealed the absurdity of the demand stating that the official letter of subdivision issued by the CDA decades ago, to the then co-owners of the plot be quashed. Notwithstanding the jabber-jaw narrative in the petition, the atrocity committed in the process was, that under the garb of an apparent attack on the CDA, the design was to engage and entrap the lawful owner of the property in frivolous litigation. Official sub-division of a plot, being one of the procedures of the CDA, is not allowed by the authority without prior approval, and only after a formal application is submitted by the owner/ co-owners of any plot. Only one bifurcation/ sub-division of a plot is allowed in respect of plots measuring 1,000 square yards and above, provided each divided portion of the plot is not less than 500 square yards. The numerical plot number, as per the master plan, is retained and allotted to the first, and to the second plot an alphabet 'A' is suffixed with the plot number. It is scandalous when extraneous parties, lacking ownership documentation, are permitted by courts to challenge procedural and administrative decisions of the CDA using Article 199, where the obvious intent is to harass the bona fide owners. The CDA is a popular target of litigation. Some might argue that people go to the judiciary as the CDA is corrupt and inefficient. While corruption and inefficiency are indeed pervasive issues plaguing all government-run systems, it is also essential to acknowledge there are upright, honest, competent and committed individuals in all set-ups working to sanitise their organisations to promote good governance. Rather than blaming each other, each state body, including the judiciary, must take an introspective approach and eradicate both inefficiency and corruption lurking within their own system. The above-mentioned case was dismissed with heavy cost by the honourable Islamabad High Court in a landmark judgement. The system, however, failed to implement the cost order. The logic of 'cost imposed' is to form a judicial shield to protect the respondent from any further malicious litigation from the litigant. Ideally, the litigant should not be allowed to file any further petition if the monetary cost imposed is unpaid. That the litigant in this case proceeded to advanced forums while sidestepping the order of cost indicates a loophole, but the fact that more dismissals were faced as the litigant proceeded is a story to be told separately, where one can praise the brilliant judicial minds (at all forums) that adjudicated. Given the rise in property frauds in the capital territory, unethical counsels who facilitate malicious litigation, and insidious litigants who harass innocent citizens must be viewed as a property-grabbing team. Whereas reform-oriented penalties, such as mandatory courses in ethical legal practice for the offending counsel and community service for the litigant would build character: when it comes to asserting authority to collect cost imposed, the judiciary must emulate the determination shown by FBR, where rules and methods are clearly laid out to collect taxes and penalties from taxpayers. The writer is an ex civil servant. She studied at the University of Oxford and taught English literature at Kinnaird College. Published in Dawn, June 3rd, 2025