KAR ACHI: The Sindh High Court on Tuesday expressed anger at the Karachi Metropolitan Corporation (KMC) for charging money for parl(ing of cars and motorcycles in different areas without providing any security and other facilities.

A two-judge bench headed by Justice Zafar Ahmed Rajput took exception to the failure of the director-charged parking of the District Municipal Corporation-South in filing comments despite earlier court directives.

It directed him to be in attendance on Dec 1and file parawise comments on the next hearing without fail.

The bench remarked that despite receiving parking fee there was no facility or protection for the vehicles, which were being stolen from such parking spaces.

A petition was filed against provincial, traffic and local authorities seeking directives for them to remove illegal and unlawful parking spots and ensure the smooth flow of traffic on the roads of the provincial metropolis.

The petitioner also sought a restraining order for the respondents from charging heavy and excessfeesforparkingofvehicles.

He submitted that `double parking` was being illegally allowed on various thoroughfares of the city causing massive traffic jams.

Citing the Sindh chief secretary, Karachi commissioner, DIG-traffic police, KMC, director-charged parking, DMC-South and others as respondents, the petitioner further submitted that there were many illegal parking lots beingrun by private parties in collusion with the respondents without any auction or legal way.

Only last month, another bench of the SHC while hearing a different petition filed against charged parking had directed the DIG-traffic and all DMCs to file comments on Nov 29 and also assist the court whether there was any structure available to regulate charged parking in the Karachi.

The bench had also asked the authorities under which law the parl(ing fee was being charged from citizens and who had authorised parking ofvehicles on roads as in several areas both sides of the thoroughfares were being used for parking disturbing the flow of traffic.

A citizen filed a petition stating that the Supreme Court had clearly restrained the authorities concerned from charging fee on the pretext of parking, but the respondents were still charging such a fee in different parts of the city by using public spaces in violation of the apex court order.