ISLAMABAD: Those who wish to visit the foreign missions located in the Diplomatic Enclave may find it much harder going than usual after the Islamabad High Court (IHC), on Wednesday, scrapped the contract of the shuttle service that operates there.

Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui of the IHC, while adjudicating a petition filed against the contract, declared the deal to exclusively run vehicles in the Diplomatic Enclave, illegal.

The court has referred the matter to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) with directions to investigate the matter and take action against the CDA officers and contractor responsible.

Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the US, the government decided to ban the entry of private vehicles into the enclave and introduced the Diplomatic Shuttle Service (DSS) to get visitors and visa seekers to different embassies.

In 2013, the IHC had referred this matter to a commission, headed by retired Justice Sardar Raza Khan. The commission had recommended the can-cellation of the contract after it emerged that the contractor was charging the government nearly double the agreed upon amount for each passenger.

The commission also suggested the recovery of the overcharged amount and action against the CDA officials involved.

It was also revealed that the CDA had been facilitating the contractor by charging a mere Rs2 per sq yard as rent for the bus station premises. This amounted to an annual ground rent of Rs44,444.

As per petition filed in the IHC, the first contract for the Diplomatic Shuttle Service was awarded to Mohammad Hussain in 2002. In 2008, CDA invited applications from interested parties and the same contractor participated in the bidding and was awarded the contract again.

The petition pointed out that the contractor charged Rs500 per passenger instead of the originally agreed rate of Rs200 per passenger, but reverted to the old rate when Hafiz Arafat Ahmed filed a petition in the IHC.

The petition claimed that the advertisement seeking applications for the shuttle was `tailor made` as it elimi-nated the other genuinely interested parties from the process and was aimed at accommodating the same contractor.

The petition alleged that the contractor, in addition to operating the bus service, was also utilising CDA land for car parking and providing other utilities such as a tea shop, photocopy facilities and a public call office to passengers on exorbitant rates.

It requested the court to direct the CDA to seek fresh bids in accordance with procurement rules. The petition also asked the court to direct the concerned authorities to determine the fares of the shuttle service strictly in accordance with the Motor Vehicles Ordinance 1965.

CDA also submitted a report, claiming that the contract was awarded in accordance with the rules.

CDA contended that a five-member team evaluated the bids and forwarded its recommendation before the CDA board.

According to the civic agency, `in this arrangement, expenditure for development of the site, and construction of structure to accommodate the facilities was to be borne by the awardee and it does not involve any allotment of site.