IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Original Jurisdiction) 
 
 
 
 
PRESENT 
 
MR. JUSTICE IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J. 
 
MR. JUSTICE TARIQ PARVEZ  
 
MR. JUSTICE AMIR HANI MUSLIM 
 
 
CONSTITUTION PETITION NO. 62 OF 2010 
 
(Marvi Memon 
Versus 
Federation of Pakistan, etc.) 
 
AND 
 
SUO MOTO CASE NO. 17 OF 2010 
(Action taken on letter sent by Mr. Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim and 
Mr. Jan Muhammad Khan Jamali regarding Unauthorized 
Diversion of Flood Water) 
 
AND 
 
HUMAN RIGHTS CASE NO. 52220-P OF 2010 
(Application by Ghazazfar Ali Khan) 
 
AND 
 
HUMAN RIGHTS CASE NO. 57247-A OF 2010 
(Application by Malik Kausar Abbas, Advocate) 
 
AND 
 
HUMAN RIGHTS CASE NO. 69622-S OF 2010 
(Application by Dr. Abbul Ghaffar Rind) 
 
 
Petitioners/ Applicants  
With Ms. Marvi Memon (in person) 
 
On Court Notice: 
 
For the Federation: 
 
Mr. Dil Muhammad Alizai, DAG 
 
 
 
 
 
Mr. Khalid Ismail Abbasi, DAG 
 
 
 
 
 
Mr. M. S. Khattak, AOR 
For Govt. of Balochistan: 
Mr. Tahir Iqbal, Addl. P.G. 
 
For Govt. of KPK  
 
Dr. Syed Arshad Hussain Shah, Addl.A.G 
 
For Govt. of Punjab 
 
Ch. Kadim Hussain Qaiser, Addl. A.G. 
 
For Govt. of Sindh 
 
Raja Abdul Ghafoor, AOR  
 
 
 
 
 
on behalf of A.G. Sindh 
 
 
Date of hearing 
 
 
07.06.2011 
 
2 
 
ORDER 
 
 
Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, CJ.:- These petitions have been 
filed under Article 184(3) of the Constitution and by invoking Suo Moto 
Jurisdiction of this Court with respective prayers noted therein. The 
facts of the petitions in a nutshell are that in the month of July/August, 
2010 due to unprecedented flood devastation the citizens of the 
country suffered huge losses against their lives and properties. The 
flood had commenced from province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and 
flowed upto Arabian Sea at Thatta, as is evident from the following 
picture:- 
 
 
2. 
 
This Court vide order dated 15.12.2010, constituted a 
Commission comprising M/s Muhammad Azam Khan, former Chief 
Secretary, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Fateh Khan Khajjak, former Chief 
Secretary, Balochistan, A. W. Kazi, former Cabinet Secretary, 
Government of Pakistan, and Kh. Zaheer Ahmed, former Federal 
Secretary, Government of Pakistan. The terms of Reference, laid down 
in the form of formulations / questions were as under:-  
 
1)  
Whether embankment breaches during the period of high 
floods in Indus River are subject to any procedure to be 
 
3 
followed by the authorities at the relevant time, if so, 
what is the manner of exercising of such powers and 
 
by whom and under what circumstances? 
2)  
Whether in the floods in River Indus in the months of July 
and August, 2010, procedure for embankment breaches 
was followed judiciously? 
3)  
Whether before ordering embankment breaches at 
different places, particularly at Ali Wahn and Tori Bund, 
no procedure was followed, if so, who is responsible for 
the same? 
4)  
Whether before embankment breaches at different 
places, 
precautionary 
measures 
were 
adopted, 
particularly in view of warnings issued from time to time 
by the metrological department of Pakistan? 
5)   
Whether the beneficiaries, if any, responsible for 
embankment breaches to save their properties / crops 
etc, are also responsible for the losses sustained by the 
affectees? 
6)  
What is the approximate volume of losses sustained by 
the affectees and Government during the floods? 
7)  
Whether relief was extended to the flood affectees on war 
footings or not? 
8)  
Jacobabad 
Airport 
was 
available 
for 
flood 
relief 
operations, if so then why the relief goods were not sent 
to affectees on urgent basis? 
9)  
What is the pace of rehabilitation in the flood devastated 
areas? 
10) 
Whether flood affectees are entitled for damages and 
compensation from the Government of Pakistan or from 
the persons who were benefited from the embankment 
breaches? 
11) 
Whether administrations of the Provincial Governments in 
private and official capacity are responsible for failing to 
manage affairs of flood affectees justly or properly, if so, 
what action is suggested against them? 
 
4 
12) 
Whether 
embankment 
of 
River 
Indus 
was 
being 
maintained annually, if not so, who is responsible for the 
same? 
13) 
Who was responsible for breaches that took place at Tori 
Bund and Ali Wahn Bund? 
 
3.  
After hearing all the parties and on the basis of oral and 
documentary evidence, related information in public domain and its 
interaction with the affectees, the Commission submitted report, 
supported by hundreds of documents which have been kept 
separately in the record and shall always be available for 
inspection, if need be. The findings of the Commission read as 
under:- 
 
“1. 
Whether embankment breaches during the period of high 
floods in Indus River are subject to any procedure to be followed 
by the authorities at the relevant time, if so, what is the manner 
of exercising of such powers and by whom and under what 
circumstances? 
 
Findings  
 
a. 
From Diamir-Bhasha downwards upto D.I. Khan, Indus 
River flows through KP and the Punjab; KP is not 
threatened by the Indus, nor any SOP for flood 
embankments was currently in vogue in the Province. 
b. 
Jinnah and Taunsa Barrages on the Indus are being 
maintained by the Punjab and Chashma Barrage is 
maintained by the WAPDA.  
c. 
Pre-designated breaching sections have been earmarked 
for the Right Guide Bund (RGB), upstream Jinnah Barrage 
for activation before the water levels threaten the barrage 
safety; for the purpose, an inter-agency civil-military 
committee 
has 
been 
notified 
by 
the 
Provincial 
Government to  
determine on-spot justification and its 
precise timing for activation by Army’s Engineers. 
d. 
The current SOPs do not authorise breaches in Left Guide 
Bund (LGB) or Left Marginal Bund (LMB) of Jinnah 
Barrage in the Punjab or for any other bunds in the 
Punjab or Sindh, as such. On the contrary, all bunds are 
required to be maintained for safety of the people, farms 
and property, as per specified guidelines. 
  
2. 
Whether in the floods in River Indus in the months of July 
and August, 2010, procedure for embankment breaches was 
followed judiciously? 
 
Findings 
 
a.  
In the Punjab, pre-designated breaches in RGB upstream 
Jinnah Barrage were operationalized to save the Barrage 
by use of explosives through the Army Engineers, on 31st 
 
5 
July 2010 after due process and diligence by the notified 
inter-agency committee.  
b.  
Other major breaches, including those in the LGB/LMB of 
Jinnah Barrage, LMB of Taunsa Barrage and its secondary 
Sunawan Bund in Muzaffargarh, Jampur Bund and 
Fakhhar Bund in Kot Mithan, of Rajanpur district were not 
caused by direct human interventions, nor permissible as 
such under any SOPs. A host of factors & reasons 
contributed 
to 
these 
breaches: 
Pre-flood 
poor 
maintenance, existence of private bunds in the river belt, 
non-observance of barrage gate regulations at critical 
hours, use of incompatible quality of material for 
rehabilitation of LMB on Taunsa and conceptual and 
design issues and motivated considerations of the duty 
staff, inconsistent with officially approved plans, besides 
complacency were noted.  
c. 
 In Sindh also, no breach to any bunds was authorized 
but these occurred in case of Tori and its loop bunds due 
to pre-flood negligence,poor maintenance and attempts to 
remove earth from the crest. In case of MS and PB Bunds 
in Thatta Sujawal, observed indifference, before and 
during the flood season and illegal practices in and around 
the bunds contributed to the breaches.  
 
3. 
Whether before ordering embankment breaches at 
different places, particularly at Aliwahan and Tori Bund, no 
procedure was followed, if so, who is responsible for the same? 
 
Findings 
 
a. 
The Tori Bund suffered years of neglected maintenance; 
its height had eroded substantially, and ‘dangerously’, 
long before the flood season; last minute, misdirected 
departmental attempt to remove earth from its crest to fill 
the ‘Garrahs’ [deep pits] on the riverside of the Bund in 
wee hours of 6/7th August further reduced its height in 
gross violation of specified guidelines; the public viewed 
that as a deliberate attempt to breach. At the relevant 
time, the Chief Engineer, Guddu, camped at Tori Rest 
House, and his team, especially the XEN in-charge, failed 
to take timely remedial measures; they were directly 
responsible 
for 
consequential 
losses 
in 
Sindh 
and 
Balochistan.  
b. 
The case of Aliwahan Bund was, however, somewhat 
different; it was not breached during 2010 floods. High 
level  consultations amongst political and civil-military 
officials 
including 
Federal, 
and 
Provincial 
political 
personages assembled  
at Sukkar for two days decided 
against this breach; in fact, the petitioner’s case was that 
Aliwahan bund should have been  
breached. 
 
4. 
Whether before embankment breaches at different places, 
precautionary measures were adopted, particularly in view of 
warnings issued from time to time by the meteorological 
department of Pakistan? 
 
Findings 
 
 a.  
The bunds are spread over thousands of km and had 
suffered extensive erosions before and during the 2010 
Flood; most vulnerable amongst these had been placed 
 
6 
under special focus for precautionary measures against 
any contingency, too. The pre-flood surveys by civil-
military teams to check the status of these structures, as 
also required by respective District Disaster Plans were 
treated as a routine. However, specific evidence was not 
produced to confirm or deny whether these inspections 
fulfilled the official instructions had been complied in 
letter, much less the spirit of statutory obligations of the 
Ordinance LIII of 2007, since converted into an Act of 
Parliament in December 2010. In many cases, field 
inspections were claimed, but not even recorded.  
b.  
The PMD’s revised forecast was late, but sufficient time 
was still available, particularly for authorities in southern 
Punjab  
and Sindh to take corrective and preventive 
measures. However, these were not effective, particularly 
as extremely wide margins were noted in the PMD’s flood 
predictions and actual flows due to unguaged torrents, 
streams and rivers. 
 
5. 
Whether 
the 
beneficiaries, 
if 
any, 
responsible 
for 
embankment breaches to save their properties/crops etc, are 
also responsible for the losses sustained by the affectees? 
 
Findings  
 
In principle, causing wrongful loss to any one is a penal offence, 
irrespective of whether the perpetrator gains from that act or 
not?  However, in the case under inquiry, though unprecedented 
losses were inflicted by acts and omissions of concerned officials 
in the irrigation hierarchies, no specific evidence was produced 
to establish wrongful gain by any specific individual, except 
general and at times vague allegations and opinions on 
management of irrigation works and ways & means to protect 
the infrastructures: e.g. 
 
a. 
In the Punjab, the CE & SE at Jinnah Barrage did not 
ensure 
pre-flood 
preparations, 
including 
mandatory 
stocking of loose stones to plug the potential breaches or 
to check non-compliance and report deficiencies in 
accordance with approved Flood Protection Plan for the 
2010 season. 
b. 
The CE at Jinnah Barrage and PMO Taunsa Barrage, both 
failed to  
ensure observance of barrage regulations, 
demonstrate effective  
control or supervision over their 
subordinates, especially after 21st July PMD warning for 
acting in accordance with approved Flood Protection Plan 
for the 2010 season. 
c. 
In case of Tori, MS and PB Bunds in two irrigation regions 
of Sindh, the then Secretary, Irrigation and two Chief 
Engineers of Guddu and Kotri Barrages, failed to take 
timely corrective measures to save affectees from the 
losses to which they were exposed, both in Sindh and 
Balochistan. 
d. 
The then Secretary Irrigation Sindh and CE Guddu not 
only  misrepresented facts before the Commission, at 
Islamabad  and the SE Kotri on site at Thatta, knowing 
these to be false and  
deliberately 
suppressed 
evidence of their respective  
culpability. 
 
6. 
What is the approximate volume of losses sustained by 
the affectees and Government during the floods? 
 
7 
 
Findings 
 
a. 
Mundane Nationwide Losses of Infrastructure:  
 
(i) 
Rs 855 billion, of which over 65% was by private 
peoples, excluding complete loss of one additional 
Rabi crop, in Jaffarabad District of Naseerabad 
Division in Balochistan. 
(ii) 
The gross loss is almost 5.8% of the GDP and at par 
with debt servicing allocations for fiscal 2010-11.   
(iii) 
Public expenses by civil and defence establishments 
from their own allocations are not reflected in the 
above losses. 
 
b. 
Indirect Losses: 
 
(i) 
Loss of human lives: 1,600, compensated or to be 
compensated @ Rs. 500,000/ per death. 
(ii) 
Loss of one-half of academic sessions of some 7.0 
million school going children. 
(iii) 
Loss of jobs: 4.5 million, mostly farm labour. 
(iv) 
Exposure to diseases and malnutrition of 20 million 
people. 
 
7. 
Whether relief was extended to the flood affectees on war 
footings or not? 
 
Finding  
 
Despite glaring cases of inadequate attention in many areas, 
the magnitude and scale of the disaster and the speed with 
which it unfolded in first phase during July 27-12th August, the 
overall rescue and relief operations launched and logistics 
mobilized at all levels including public responses constituted an 
impressive chapter of managerial history, particularly, if regard 
was paid to prevailing organizational erosion since 1969. Both 
civil and military establishments mobilized whatever they could; 
the NGOs extended full cooperation to the affectees. The 
administration in KP and the Punjab remained most visibly 
active.  
 
8. 
Jacobabad 
Airport 
was 
available 
for 
flood 
relief 
operations, if so then why the relief goods were not sent to 
affectees on urgent basis? 
 
Finding Presence of sizeable number of foreign personnel at the 
Jacobabad Airbase for sometime was confirmed; that may have 
created a perception of its inaccessibility for relief goods. The 
foreign nationals were reportedly employed to train and assist 
PAF staff for upgrading facilities, before arrival of the new batch 
of F-16 planes, due by December 2010, at that time. However, 
the number of relief flights, flown in and out of Jacobabad 
airport, during August and September do not substantiate that it 
remained inaccessible, except on technical grounds of capacity 
constraints. The PAF confirmed that the base provided a virtual 
air-bridge for relief operations, in an area, otherwise cut off from 
rest of the province for many weeks; that contradicted the 
assertion of closure of the facility for relief assistance.  
 
 
8 
9. 
What is the pace of rehabilitation in the flood devastated 
areas? 
 
Findings The Planning Commission has developed a hard core 
portfolio 
of 
priority 
works 
for 
restoration 
of 
damaged 
infrastructure at a cost of Rs. 277 billion, in next 3 years. The 
program has been designed in consultation with federating units 
and International Development Partners. It was, however, 
conditional to part funding by the DFIs. It contains sectoral / 
regional schemes for immediate to short-term execution. The 
main component of Rehabilitation programmes include: 
 
a. 
Rehabilitation of Affectees: 
 
(i) 
Most affectees have returned to their native places, 
except 
in 
Sindh 
and 
Jaffarabad 
district 
of 
Naseerabad Division of Balochistan where some 
relief camps are still operating, as pre-conditions 
conducive to revival of life and living have not 
been restored. 
(ii) 
Compensation of first tranche of Rs.20,000 per 
household to rebuild/ repair houses, contributed by 
Federal and Provincial Governments on 50:50 basis 
has almost been completed, except cases being re-
verified 
for 
various 
reasons 
of 
imperfect 
documentation or cases of observed anomalies. 
(iii) 
Remaining payment of Rs.80,000/ per household is 
expected to commence after disbursement of loans 
from WB/ ADB etc. The Provinces have used this 
delay for recertification of the contested claims.  
(iv) 
Some friendly countries and NGOs have donated / 
offered construction of model villages following 
Build Back Better [BBB] policy with necessary civic 
amenities; the work is steadily progressing on 
ground. 
 
b.  
Restoration of Irrigation Infrastructure:  
 
(i) 
The Farm sector activity has been revived in the 
provinces, except directly affected districts of 
Jaffarabad and Jhal Magsi in Balochistan; for the 
latter two areas, the Hon’able Court has issued 
orders for time bound restoration of irrigation 
supplies in the light of interim recommendations of 
the Commission. 
(ii) 
KP and the Punjab reacted promptly to restore 
losses 
to 
irrigation 
network 
from 
their 
own 
resources. 
(iii) 
The Sindh Government did not move as promptly as 
expected; however, it finally prioritized execution of 
39 development schemes worth Rs.5,000 million, 
for rehabilitation of bunds / canals commenced after 
receipt of 50% federal subvention, in early March 
2011. 
(iv) 
 Balochistan too did not initiate rehabilitation of 
farm sector in Naseerabad Division, with requisite 
urgency 
pending 
restoration 
of 
damaged 
infrastructure in Sindh due to paucity of funds. 
 
 
9 
10. 
Whether flood affectees are entitled for damages and 
compensation from the Government of Pakistan or from the 
persons who were benefited from the embankment breaches? 
 
Findings 
 
a. 
The Calamities Act 1958 did not obligate compensation 
for losses on account of any natural disaster, much less 
1947 
type 
claims. 
However, 
as 
a 
natural 
social 
compassion, ex-gratia ad-hoc compensation is invariably 
provided to affectees in distress or victims exposed to 
natural or man-made disasters beyond their bearing 
capacity. The governments also remit abyana and land 
revenue in calamity affected areas. With the promulgation 
of the NDMA Ordinance/Act, however, fixation of an 
objective scale for compensation has become a statutory 
duty. For the 2010 Flood, a scale of compensation was 
approved by the ECC. The ECC approval did not, however, 
take into account where affectees lost their land to rivers 
or landslides in mountains. The NDMC or other provincial 
bodies under the Ordinance LIII of 2007 did not adopt the 
ECC’s political guidelines, formally. A limited insurance 
cover by ZTBL window is available to farmers but it was/is 
not availed by most. 
b. 
As noted in the Commissions’ findings under formulation 
No 5 supra, no proof of wrongful gains was produced, 
though extensive losses were suffered, as stated above. 
 
11. 
Whether administrations of the Provincial Governments in 
private and official capacity are responsible for failing to manage 
affairs of flood affectees justly or properly, if so, what action is 
suggested against them? 
 
Finding: Primary source of disaster was attributable to the 
collapse of irrigation structures, new and old, that caused 
unprecedented damages to rest of the public and private 
infrastructure and property. However, the magnitude of losses is 
so large, that no individual or government was in a position to 
compensate for the losses on stand alone basis, at least 
immediately. The more so, as for over three decades, Pakistan’s 
scarce resources have been diverted to unwelcome wars imposed 
during extra-constitutional regimes, without peoples’ sanction 
since widened to a three-dimensional security threat, from within 
and without, under extraordinary conditions. Following measures 
may be considered: 
 
a. 
The action against officials of the Punjab government held 
responsible for acts of omission and Commission as 
identified 
by 
the 
Punjab 
Judicial 
Commission 
be 
proceeded against in due process.  
 
b. 
The Governments may sensitize the WB about the direct 
and indirect losses caused by breach in Taunsa’s LMB that 
had cascading effect on other bunds with request to 
absorb 
expenditure 
on 
(a) 
above, 
plus 
other 
compensation for the affectee-farmers in Muzaffargarh 
District.  
 
 
c. 
In Sindh also, the then Secretary Irrigation and Chief 
Engineer Guddu be thoroughly investigated under direct 
 
10 
supervision of Sindh High Court, to account for their 
failure to take timely preventive measures, reasonably 
predicted in February 2010 and before, with respect to 
Tori Bund and the acts and omissions leading to its 
eventual collapse after the onset of heavy rains on 27th 
July 2010 in KP and G-B and consequent floods. 
d. 
 Likewise, the CE and SE Kotri be subjected to explain 
their failures to rectify and repair MS and PB Bunds, 
despite four-week advance warning. 
e. 
 Special audit of all the provincial irrigation works 
executed during last 10 years at least, be conducted. 
f. 
Strengthening of Federal Flood Commission and oversight 
of the NDMA as per law.  
g. 
In the immediate to short term Farmers’ association may 
be encouraged to persuade their members to avail 
insurance cover through ‘Zarai Taraqiati Bank’ (ZTBL) 
window.  
h. 
Long-term bonds may be issued to farmers having 
subsistence holdings, through ZTBL, as a token of 
recognition of their damages suffered due to consistent 
official neglect.  
 
12. 
Whether 
embankment 
of 
River 
Indus 
was 
being 
maintained annually, if not so, who is responsible for the same? 
 
Finding: Most embankments were not maintained, as required 
and specified in SOPs; this also reflected mis-match in resource 
allocations, except in case of LMB on Taunsa, rehabilitated in 
2008-2009 at a considerable cost under a WB funded project. 
Most 
breaches 
also 
indicated 
serious 
organizational 
and 
managerial issues impinging upon professionals’ apathy besides 
being an indicator of widespread corrupt practices in the 
hierarchy. That is also due to disproportionate commitment to 
canal 
water 
distribution 
under 
political 
influences; 
local 
committees and user-charges for recovery of maintenance funds 
may be considered, as offered by KP farmers to improve 
communication for timely actions. 
 
13. 
Who was responsible for breaches that took place at Thori 
Bund and Ali Wahn Bund? 
 
Finding: As noted under TOR no. 3 above, the Tori breach was 
attributable primarily to negligence of CE Guddu and his team; 
his immediate supervisor, the then Secretary Irrigation and 
author of the revised Bund Manual, was equally, if not more, 
culpable with them, on two counts:  
 
Firstly, failure to ensure upgradation of the bund before 2010 
Flood as mandated by the IRC on 4th February 2010; and 
 
Secondly, for suppressing evidence, with an attempt to mislead 
the Commission, knowing full well about pre-flood state of Tori 
Bund; they both committed perjury, knowing it to be such. The 
last minute shifting of Irrigation’s Minister’s portfolio needs to be 
explored too, by the political leadership in that context to rule 
out manipulation or divert the focus of failed bunds from 
departmental 
acts 
and 
omissions 
to 
political 
leadership, 
notwithstanding the confusion compounded by his irresponsible 
statement.  
 
The Urdu translation of the said findings is as under:- 
 
11 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
12 
 
 
 
 
 
13 
 
 
 
 
 
14 
 
 
 
 
 
15 
 
 
 
16 
 
 
 
 
 
17 
 
 
 
18 
 
 
4. 
 
The Commission after examination of evidence and the 
relevant record made the following concluding remarks:- 
 
 
“CONCLUDING REMARKS  
 
67. 
The adumbration of the above evidence, the information and the 
Commission’s field visits when related to the relevant official instructions and 
observed practices established that:- 
 
a. 
The NDMA’s lead role in coordination of rescue and relief phases during 
and after the floods to save life, if not the property, was outstanding, by 
any standard. But it did not put in position pre-disaster structural 
framework or administrative network mandated in 2006 or contemplated 
by the NDMA Ordinance 2007 (LIII of 2007) or 2009 Ordinance, despite 
passage of over 42 months till June 2010 or later to-date.  
b. 
The PMD’s rain forecasts were timely but its estimations regarding flood 
discharges were not as accurate as it was generally perceived; the FFD 
 
19 
needed to factor in the flows from hill torrents and along other rivers 
where no gauges are installed; the need to boost its capacity to forecast 
beyond 4-days advance warning as compared to 10-days international 
best was also established; during flood season 2010, its 28th June 
assessment was off the mark within 3-weeks. More than that, scientific 
simulations and weather modelling approach by highly qualified 
mathematical models could also generate better outcomes. The PMD 
should not have ignored international assessments except at a great peril, 
even if these did not conform to its wildest estimations, knowing in-house 
technical capacity constraints. 
c. 
The KP did not have the occasion or adequate time to plan or act against 
flash floods, but in terms of response time and actions, it acted fast to 
restore the damaged irrigation supplies through make-shift arrangements 
that enabled most farmers to plant a bumper Rabi crop for 2010-11 to 
help revive life and living of most affected people as many lost their lands 
to the river action. 
d. 
The Punjab had limited but reasonable notice for preventive measures 
and for issuing warnings to people. While threat to Jinnah Barrage was 
averted, other breaches including the breaches to LGB/LMB of Jinnah 
Barrage and those induced by human intervention could have been 
checked, partly or wholly, to minimize loss of life and property, though 
these had indirectly but considerably benefited by easing out the pressure 
on controlled irrigation structures in Sindh.  
e. 
Like KP, the Punjab administration in coordination with Armed Forces 
also led the operations from the front, for rescue and relief inter-alia to 
restore/ replace two most damaged LMBs within record time and speed, 
by associating private sector and by invoking emergency codes, designed 
for such eventualities; that prevented damages from 2nd peak of flood 
flows. The Provincial administrations led by example. This Commission 
would not like to make any further observation on that account in view of 
inherent limitations of subjecting executive judgements in crisis to 
retroactive wisdom except to ward off future pitfalls. But projects executed 
under emergency provisions be subjected to special audit, as a policy. 
f. 
In view of sharp political divide in the Muzaffargarh and DG Khan, 
possibility of mischief in inflicting cuts or politically motivated charges 
could not be conclusively ruled out as besides FIRs, almost 100 writs 
were filed in LHC from hese Districts. 
g. 
The officials in-charge of irrigation structures responsible for inefficiency, 
negligence or corrupt practices identified in departmental inquiries are 
expected to be proceeded against under due process. This Commission 
would not like to make any further observations with respect to officials’ 
subject matter of inquiry of Punjab Judicial Commission. 
 
20 
h. 
The then Secretary Irrigation, Sindh and the then Chief Engineer Guddu 
were well aware of the poor state of Tori Bund long before the 2010 
Flood; they had adequate time and to attend to that work but failed to 
move in time. 
i. 
The then Chief Engineer Guddu, by his own admission, and his 
immediate superior, the Secretary Irrigation, had failed to anticipate the 
expected level of flood waters at Guddu Barrage that inundated Sindh’s 
three major districts besides Balochistan’s Jaffarabad district. 
j. 
Both Chief Engineer Guddu and the then Secretary Irrigation consciously 
and deliberately, tried to attribute disaster due to inadequate maintenance 
and funding constraints during yester-years, besides justifying former’s 
absence from the Tori Bund breach site at the critical time for reasons of 
heavy rainfall that never was, and the claim that that made vehicular tour 
of the bund impossible. Especially in view of his own PC-I of 4th February 
2010 and Planning Commission’s consensus document that rebut the 
factum of over-topping.  
k. 
The SEs and XENs incharge of the breached bunds in Guddu and Kortri 
command areas are likewise responsible.    
l. 
The 2010 Flood in Sindh was unprecedented to the extent of duration of 
the peak flows though the discharges were lower than the 1976 Flood. 
m. 
The pre and post Flood 2010 IRC proceedings contradicted in material 
terms Mr. Junejo’s contention, that most bunds other than those directly 
raised in the subject matter of petitions were maintained at reasonable 
level of repair.  
n.  
The possibility that certain elements within the Irrigation hierarchies 
mislead its political leadership regarding benefits of creation of additional 
water storage cannot be ruled out.  
o. 
The World Bank programme on drainage in last three decades and 
Taunsa Rehabilitation project may be reviewed to ensure transparency 
especially in the context of technology transfer and training of local 
professionals and Para-technical staff.  
p. 
The packages prepared for the restoration of irrigation works and 
embankments had a cost factor of Rs.61 billion in Sindh alone, and the 
consensus DNA of Rs.11 billion raises legitimate and serious concerns in 
respect of departmental practices. 
q. 
AGP may also undertake special audit of funds expended in last 10-years 
for irrigation sector including review of its own reports. 
 
   
68. 
It was stated that in many areas people ignored warnings about 
impending disasters for various reasons. Manifest disconnect at local levels may 
have made them brush aside implicit or explicit dangers for public infrastructure, 
large and small, standing agricultural crops by unsuspecting / ill-prepared people, 
 
21 
limited access to TV network further impeded by uneven load-shedding in rural 
areas, pre-occupation with fasting and worship.  
 
69. 
Given the imperfect nature of observed communication with the affectees 
and their sympathisers, as water flows increased, perceptions mixed with reality 
compounded the confusion. Parliamentary debates did not dispel adverse public 
perceptions, both woven by design or with effort. Meantime, the official credibility 
touched a new low; numbers were no longer relevant; even one complainant was 
too many to generate media blitz. The local and national media chased the 
waters, as brave men and women anchors and public representatives repeatedly 
flagged to the authorities about areas of default, real or potential, suggesting 
absence of coordinated response. The HR Petitions filed by two Parliamentarians, 
one each from both sides of the divide, including the Deputy Chairman, Senate of 
Pakistan who sent a letter to Hon’ble Court through a leading Jurist, and an 
energetic lady Member of the National Assembly, amongst others, who chose to 
travel extensively on the water trail and documented the media coverage, 
members of the Bar and general public, all opted to invoke Article 184 (3) 
Jurisdiction of the apex Court.  
 
70. 
In areas with sharp political divisions, intense public debates focussed on 
malicious breaches, to allegations of favours to local influentials who manage to 
secure appointments for their loyal supporters, inadequacy of assistance 
rendered alongside questions impinging on fairness in distribution and 
disbursements, both in the context of Federating units and marooned people who 
awaited rescue operations through transport planes and Heli-lifting relief supplies 
in many inaccessible areas were voiced by media. Not to be left alone, 
international communities also voiced their concerns, some indirectly, others were 
not so subtle. Though it realized the dimension of the fast unfolding disaster a bit 
late, to offer support, on 18th August 2010, the UN Secretary General convened a 
special Session in which Foreign Governments, DFIs, UN Specialized Agencies 
and other International Organizations to made generous pledges for donations 
and/or loans for the people whose blood and resources had been overstretched 
by the war imposed on them; rhetoric dominated disbursements. The reports that 
international community had honoured only 50% of the pledged contributions in 
the UN sponsored Funding appeal finally led to composition of the NODMC, 
created with Provincial representation to oversee and guide fairly and justly the 
Reconstruction and Rehabilitation plans. 
 
71. 
The processing of loans by DFI’s also took its time and payment of 2nd 
tranche of Rs.80,000/ household was delayed, leading to frustrated expectations; 
these multiplied complaints of inaction or negligence. From the material brought 
on record, it was established that Federal & Provincial Governments and local 
administrations, supported by general public, political workers, local and 
international NGOs, all joined hands to launch the humanitarian assistance on 
 
22 
unprecedented dimensions, unfamiliar for its management structures eroded 
systematically and subcutaneously, since 1969. Men & women, civil and military 
personnel deployed for the purpose rushed with dedication whatever, from 
wherever and in whatever mode was possible under those conditions. At the initial 
stages, saving lives of the marooned, provision of essential food, safe drinking 
water were the obvious priorities; utensils and other voluntary services were 
trucked and airlifted as Medical professionals including the internees joined. Most 
people had no idea that weather takes no note of their belief systems. Disaster 
not only evoked and channelized public sympathy, at home & abroad, some major 
channels actively conducted awareness programs for private charity, collected 
and disbursed relief assistance, at times by enlisting feme-fatale celebrities of all 
hue and shade. Besides saving many precious lives, these agencies had done 
what was humanly possible, in view of the organizational & logistic constraints. 
That was, however, not so with respect to many in the Provincial Irrigation 
hierarchies.  
 
72. 
Only WAPDA had had the opportunity to review its SOPs in the wake of 
Ataabad Lake syndrome to alert its senior professional team to explore and 
examine all options to meet any contingency, in the context of threats to Tarbela 
and downstream Chashma, should the Attabad Lake burst by any chance. Like 
NDMA, the KP and the Punjab also acted with utmost dedication in conjunction 
with armed forces to minimize impact of the disaster, at times beyond the call of 
duty. These efforts need institutional back up.  
 
73. 
As public perceptions, at home and abroad, compounded, including those 
from within the coalition partners, the Provincial Governments of Sindh and the 
Punjab constituted Judicial Commissions to probe into alleged acts of 
malfeasance or nonfeasance by the respective administrations. For obvious 
reasons, their ToRs were focussed to the specific complaints, rather than 
functionally and spatially integrated dimensions commensurate with scale of the 
national catastrophe, or redressal of publicly voiced complaints, in their entirety. 
This Commission benefited from the evidentiary material collected by the two 
Commissions with due regard to Ordinance II of 1969. 
74. 
A comprehensive Disaster Risk Management plan is required to be 
developed by the NDMA. To do so it has to take an overview of many factors that 
impinges on this function under stressful conditions. According to an ADB paper 
‘a disaster plan must incorporate measures to reduce exposure. A reliable system 
must contemplate reducing exposure, early warning and strengthen resilience of 
the affectees before, during the onset of the calamity, and later in restoration 
stages. It also identified various elements including but not limited to: a) 
Acceleration of programs for infrastructure improvements to keep up with 
ballooning urban population; to develop alternatives to those living in high-risk 
areas, protection and restoration of ecosystems that buffer the impact of natural 
 
23 
hazards;  b) ensuring timely warnings to reach individuals, to develop flexible 
systems ranging from global monitoring, regional, and national preparation to 
local emergency action; customize wording of warnings and methods used for 
local communities; to expand income options in rural areas, reducing reliance on 
a single crop; and c) encouraging regional cooperation that helps stricken 
economies to recover, protection and restoration of ecosystems that provide and 
enhance the livelihood of rural populations’ 
75. 
On behalf of civil society, a case was made out for early restoration of LG 
systems; that was a legitimate suggestion but needs democratic realignment of its 
design to strengthen management structures for good governance; it is not to be 
a mutually exclusive system at the cost of good administration by colour blind 
rule. The 2001 LG system, put on hold in all the Provinces, and not practiced in 
44 cantonments administered under a 1924 Act and Islamabad managed under 
1960 MA Ordinance, despite two elections in 2001 and 2005 and removal of 
reasons for not enforcing two Ordinances of 2002 need serious consideration too. 
 
76. 
Before concluding, the Commission will like to flag its concerns about 
frequent efforts and attempts to tamper and meddle with tried and tested 
management and administrative structures of the country, and without any plans 
for up gradation of essential skills except investing in foreign demand-led areas. 
Controversial reform packages, at the behest of usurpers who engage ‘fly by 
night’ consultants with sole and premeditated task of perpetuation of their regimes 
and wrapped up with their exit from the scene need no more comments. There is 
no caveat that while changes in all man-made systems are necessary and must 
be subjected to periodical review, to do so without creating a viable alternate is 
most unwise. The moreso, as half baked attempts demoralized the key service 
institutions; e.g. those established by inter-provincial consensus of the founding 
fathers in December 1949 and sustained by successive constitutions, including 
1973 decimated within a few days of commencement of the constitution and 
despite political accord of October 1972 on which it was founded. Disruption of 
appropriate training to align the service memberships with growing challenges of 
the time has taken its own toll. Like the bunds, not kept up as per the Bund 
Manual, these validly made constitutional institutions suffered erosion from the 
corroding influences of last 42 years of practices violative of basic law, and 
without remorse.  
 
77. 
Last but not the least, extensive encroachments in the flood plain was 
flagged by most as one of the key factors responsible for obstructing the natural 
river flows, especially during the flood seasons. The Commission noted enormity 
of the dimensions of this practice during aerial view along the Indus River in two 
provinces in the form of vast lush green farms planted and interspersed 
throughout the reach of the Indus River bed where it flows on the ridge. During its 
hearings, two more issues were highlighted: Allotments of lands to Sindh “haris” in 
 
24 
Katcha area by a previous administration and growth of housing settlements to 
meet one of the most basic needs of shelter for growing population. (This is not 
unique to the River plains; mushroom growth of ‘Katchi abadis’ in Islamabad’s 
most developed urban centre and seat of Federal Government is not free from 
that malady.) In the Commission’s view this is a symptom of policy failure, not a 
disease: successive governments have failed to develop and execute town 
planning as an integral and unavoidable instrument of state policy under which 
need oriented provision had to be made for meeting the residential 
requirements of the growing population rather than growth of affordability driven 
expansions. As a direct result thereof, leaving aside a few developers, this vital 
state function has been abdicated to real estate agents; the more organised and 
fortunate amongst the society resorted to housing cooperatives with DHAs in the 
lead; many proved inadequate in view of the sharp mismatch in supply of and 
demand for developed housing sites as well as emergence of opportunists and 
‘qabza’ groups patronised under local influentials with all the attendant 
consequences. As ‘Kacthi abadi’ culture flourished as a ‘benign dispensation’ for 
most vulnerable exposed under the paradigm of ‘affordability’ and allowed to live 
under ‘hewers of wood and drawers of water’, as a shortcut having no other viable 
option; be it ad-hoc appointees in education and health sectors, frequently 
regularized sans due process mandated by articles 4 and 25; in irrigation sector, 
posting of personnel rendered surplus after abolition of posts/ departments, by 
absorbing against jobs inconsistent with their professional credentials did not 
raise any eyebrows. As enforcement lagged in every field, rule of law suffered and 
corruption multiplied by the hour as an end product to haunt many, so much so 
that even laws protected under First schedule of the constitution for removal of 
illegal possessions of state properties and host of other laws listed earlier could 
not be invoked: routine conversion of plots / estates in residential localities into 
commercial centres continue to compound the traffic congestion in urban centres 
besides creating extreme pressure on essential civic infrastructure of schools and 
hospitals.  Recently the CDA has managed to secure thousands of Kanals of its 
land, worth tens of billions, from unauthorized occupants after the apex Court 
issued orders under Suo moto jurisdiction. The state needs to revisit its basic 
responsibilities too. 
 
78. 
The largest damage to public sector infrastructure was suffered by the 
Transport and Communication sector. Complaints of human interventions has 
also been voiced and the NHA was directed to apprise the Commission about 
such breaches in road network in various provinces and the estimated losses; 
including the reasons for overtopping of M-I motorway.”  
 
The Urdu translation of the said concluding remarks is given below:- 
 
 
 
 
 
25 
 
 
 
 
26 
 
 
27 
 
 
 
 
 
28 
 
 
 
 
 
29 
 
 
 
 
 
30 
 
 
5. 
 
In view of the above findings and concluding remarks, the 
Commission made the following recommendations:-  
“RECOMMENDATIONS 
INTRODUCTION  
 
79. As a result of its interaction with the representatives of 
various federal & provincial governments, ministries and 
institutions as well as the media, civil society organizations of 
the general public, the Commission considers it appropriate 
to include a member of important recommendations in the 
Report.  
 
80. Although the following recommendations are not directly 
in response to the formulations contained in the 15th 
December, 2010 Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of 
Pakistan, these are nevertheless highly relevant to flood 
 
31 
control measures for preventing possible damage and 
devastation in the future. The Hon’ble Supreme Court may 
like to consider these submissions, for whatever action it 
deems necessary.  
 
I. EXPANSION OF FLOOD EARLY WARNING SYSTEMS 
(FEWS) 
 
81. The current early warning facilities in the country are of a 
limited nature. According to Meteorology Department, the 
range of forecast is barely 3-4 days. Due to limited technical 
capacity, we are lagging far behind the developed countries. 
There are only 07 Radars in the whole country. There is no 
coverage in the northwest of the country and Balochistan, 
including the coastal belt of 960 km.  
 
82. Although Pakistan is a member of the Word Meteorology 
Organization (WMO), it is not accessing information from it. 
Nor is it taking full advantage of information available with it. 
The Hon’ble Supreme Court may wish to advise the 
Government of Pakistan for taking the following measures at 
the earliest:  
 
a. 
Expansion of radar coverage to the whole country.  
b. 
Establishing a coordinating mechanism with WMO 
and the SAARC  countries for accessing / sharing information 
on early weather warning.  
 
II. FLOOD MITIGATION  
 
83. During the devastating floods of 2010 which not only 
caused damage of life and property in the private sector but 
huge damage also occurred to the public sector infrastructure 
such as sweeping away of roads, bridges and a large number 
of schools, colleges and BHU’s etc.  
 
84. In 
its 
interaction 
with 
public 
and 
private 
sector 
institutions, the Commission noted with concern that major 
damage occurred due to lack of maintenance and repair of 
river embankments, canals, and obstruction by major 
highways/motorways 
constructed 
by 
the 
Irrigation 
department and the National Highway Authority (NHA) and 
others across the country.  
 
32 
 
A. BARRAGES AND BUNDS  
 
85. Several bunds, canals and barrages experienced breaches 
as a result. In the case of Jinnah Barrage, the breaching 
sections were identified before and were breached after 
proper consultative progress. The water discharged from such 
pre-designated breaches was channelized and it re-entered 
the Indus downstream. This was not so in the case of other 
bunds where no such provision existed and yet these bunds 
were allowed to be breached. This caused huge damage to 
life or property besides rendering thousands unemployed and 
homeless.  
 
 
86. During its deliberations, the Commission observed that 
most damages could have been prevented if strategically 
located escape points, like the Raini Canal, were available at 
barrages, 
bunds 
and 
motorways/highways. 
Adequate 
systems could be put in place providing for a consultative 
plan for maintenance of bunds through assured funding, if 
necessary, by generating funds from water users as was 
offered by formers in KP. Provision for pre-designated 
breaches at barrages, bunds and motorways/highways could 
be provided after conducting a detail survey and preparing 
feasibility reports.  
 
B. MOTORWAYS/HIGHWAYS 
 
87. It was brought to the notice of the Commission by 
representatives of KP that the major reason for inundation of 
agricultural lands and abadis on the northern side of 
Peshawar-Islamabad Motorway (M1) was the inadequate 
capacity of crossing bridges meant for the drainage of flood 
flows in rivers located between Peshawar and Mardan. The 
motorway virtually acted like a “bund” obstructing the natural 
course of water flows in the area. The bed of river Kabul, 
upstream and downstream of the main Kabul river bridge, 
has silted up to an alarming level which has decreased the 
waterway and poses a serious threat of out-flanking and 
over-topping of this vitally important structure during floods. 
In fact, this happened during the flood of 2010 near the Jindi 
River which damaged the M1 resulting in closure of the 
 
33 
motorway for several days. Similar concerns were voiced by 
representatives of civil society organizations and provinces.  
 
88. It is imperative for the NHA and the FFC to carry out a 
joint survey and study of all its road network in the country 
to identify areas of possible flooding as a result of obstruction 
caused by these roads and take remedial measures for 
provision of designated escape channels to ease the pressure 
of flood at various potential locations. The provincial 
highways and irrigation departments may also be associated. 
The Hon’ble Supreme Court may wish to advise the 
government to initiate actions, accordingly.  
 
III. ENCROACHMENTS 
 
89. The 
2010 
Flood 
has 
fully 
exposed 
the 
illegal 
encroachments which have been allowed to go unchecked by 
the concerned authorities due to negligence, corruption and 
poor managements resulting in massive losses to life and 
property.  
 
90. Thousands of acres of “Katcha” lands have been illegally 
encroached upon by local influentials or have been leased out 
on nominal charges resulting in erection of private bunds. 
Construction of houses and other built up properties have 
been allowed along river banks and canals etc. Similarly, 
there has been a surge of encroachments on acquired lands 
in pond areas of barrages which has aggravated the flood 
hazards. The natural flow of water has been blocked as a 
result of numerous encroachments in most waterways due to 
unplanned and illegal constructions.  
 
91. Unfortunately, the local and provincial governments have 
themselves indulged in encouraging illegal acts promoting 
encroachments. Unauthorized and technically unsound public 
works have been executed by local authorities. Construction 
of roads and gas pipelines have been allowed to pass through 
bunds 
in 
contravention 
of 
legal 
provisions. 
All 
such 
encroachments have contributed to obstructions in the flow of 
water resulting in flooding of many areas. A matter of grave 
concern which came to the notice of the Commission was that 
some of the governments are selling acquired lands in pond 
 
34 
areas to raise revenues. Under the law, no construction of 
any infrastructure is allowed to be erected within a distance 
of 200 feet from banks of the rivers/streams. It should be a 
matter of serious concern if the government itself indulges in 
unlawful acts of selling those very lands which it had acquired 
to protect irrigation infrastructure and property of the 
citizens.  
 
  
92. The governments must correct that and ensure that no 
encroachments are permitted and no acquired lands are sold 
or leased out. Actions should be initiated by governments to 
remove all encroachments with a firm hand. It should also 
ensure that all such illegally constructed structures on 
government lands which had been destroyed by the recent 
floods are not allowed to be re-erected.  
 
93. The Hon’ble Supreme Court may wish to consider 
appropriate directions to the government in this regard.  
 
IV. MUNDA DAM 
 
94. The proposed Munda Dam project, 6 km upstream of 
Munda Headworks, is in an advanced technical engineering 
stage. When constructed it would provide water storage of 
1.3 MAF and produce 740 megawatts of power. More 
importantly, it would completely control the flows of water in 
Swat River and its tributaries which eventually flow into the 
Indus at Khairabad, Attock district. Had Munda Dam been 
constructed, there would have been minimal damage 
downstream in Charsadda, Peshawar and Nowshera districts 
and Munda Headworks. The example of Gomal Zam Dam can 
be quoted here which is under construction and was 
responsible for preventing flooding of Dera Ismail Khan 
district even though it is partially complete. Keeping in view 
the great benefits of this Dam, the Hon’ble Supreme Court 
may consider advising the Federal Government to expedite 
execution of Munda Dam and prioritize work on other 
potential sites to optimize gains from natural endowments.” 
 
 
The Urdu translation of the above said recommendations is as under:- 
 
 
 
35 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
36 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
37 
 
 
 
 
 
 
38 
 
 
6. 
 
Besides the above findings and recommendations, the 
Commission, has noted following important impressions:- 
‘Pakistan’s current water storage capacity is limited to 10-15% 
of annual availability, rest flows to the Arabian Sea. With 
additional storage, the Nature’s free bounty will not only add 
cheapest electricity and feed up to 500 million people’: 
Muhammad Shakil Durrani, Chairman WAPDA. 
 
In 2006-2007, the NDMA was established under an inter-
Provincial Commission headed by the Prime Minister ‘to regulate 
the 
national 
disaster 
management 
system 
to 
overcome 
unforeseen situations’ through a network of PDMAs & DDMAs: 
Presidential Ordinances (XL of 2006, XV & LIII of 2007), 
enacted in December 2010 as Act XXIV of 2010. 
 
Besides 1,600 deaths, the 2010 Flood inflicted an estimated loss 
of Rs.855 billion of which 65% was on private account; 4.5 
million lost jobs, mostly in farm sector besides Rabi crops for 
2010-11, unprecedented 20 million people were rendered IDPS 
and 7.0 million students were deprived of ½ of their academic 
session: Official Reports. 
 
‘In all, 1,296 rescue and relief flights were handled by the PAF 
out of which 767 flights were operated from the Shahbaz 
Airbase, in jacobabad, alonge’:Mr. Rab Nawaz, Secretary, the 
Punjab I & P Department. 
 
‘….LGB/LMB [of Jinnah Barrage] had already eroded (on 29 July) 
due to ‘pathetic handling of barrage gates’ by the XEN Incharge 
of the regulation who apparently left it to the lower staff to 
decide,and forge the record later’: Mr. Rab Nawaz, Secretary, 
the Punjab I & P Department. 
 
39 
… ‘relevant staff of the Irrigation Department is well trained and 
capable of dealing with any flood like situation’. Sindh 
government’s official statement in the NDMA meeting held 
on 28th June 2010, at Islamabad. 
 
‘…most bunds, including Tori Bund, had lost almost 70 inches or 
so of their designed heights that contemplated six feet freeboard 
over 1976 HF Line with additional margin of 1-2 feet’: 
Statement by Mr. Zafarullah Mehr, Former Chief engineer, 
Guddu Barrage, on behalf of the Sindh Government. 
 
‘….the sudden build-up at Tarbela and Mangla during next 2-3 
days, took every one by surprise…it came down in a relatively 
shorter period…..As a consequence, the Troi and MC Bunds 
overtopped by excessive flows’. Statement by Mr. Shuja 
Junejo, Former Secretary I & P Sindh, ex-officio Vice 
Chairman, The IRC and Editor Revised Sindh Bund Manual. 
 
‘….no bund was overtopped’: The Draft Flood Rehabilitation 
Plan, 2010, Planning Commission, dated 15 December, 
2010. 
 
… that due to heavy downpour during the flood season, deep 
garrahs occurred which were filled by scraping the top of the 
bund so that a adequate freeboard was found deficient and 
water tear had weakened the bund:’ Record of IRC meeting 
dated 14 October 2010 (Agenda Item no.85, at page 59). 
 
‘Sindh TV’……cameramen were the first to capture the illegal 
breach of Tori Bund, much before arrival of the high floods’ 
:Statement by Mr. Javed Ahmed Soomro, Reporter “Sindh 
TV”.  
 
‘Sindh administration was negligent as it did not take 
appropriate measures, though the flood waters from Khyber 
Pakhtunkhwa (KP) took almost 3 weeks to reach Kotri’: Sh. 
Nisar Hussain, Bureau Chief of  ‘Apna TV’.   
 
40 
 
7. 
 
Amongst them, one of the most important impressions is 
mentioned on the top of the list. This statement has been made by a 
person not less than the status of Chairman WAPDA, denial whereof 
apparently is not possible, unless rebutted by any other cogent 
version. How a country like Pakistan, whose economy mainly depends 
on agricultural growth, can afford that its 85-90% of water flows into 
the Arabian Sea, thus goes waste, surely due to non effective 
administrative plans including increasing the current water storage 
capacity, which is not only the cheapest source of generation of 
electricity thereby adding the resources for the welfare of the citizens. 
The Commission in its recommendations has emphasized on the need 
of completion of construction of Munda Dam. The Federal Government 
is directed to look into this aspect of the matter seriously. 
8. 
 
The 
Inquiry 
Commission 
has 
documented 
in 
a 
comprehensive manner the reasons of unprecedented flood of 2010. 
No doubt it was a natural calamity, essentially beyond the limits and 
resources of Federal and Provincial Governments to control the same. 
As far as extending the relief to the victims is concerned, no stone was 
left unturned to reach out to them, for which the credit goes to the 
respective governments, but at the same time had there been a 
comprehensive management plan to control the same before time by 
strengthening 
the 
embankments 
(Bands) 
by 
the 
Provincial 
Governments, particularly encroachment in the river banks on account 
of which the flow of water was blocked, as it has been pointed out 
hereinabove, or strengthen the embankments and at the same time 
ensuring maintenance of same from engineering point of view on 
annual basis, there was every probability of reducing the quantum of 
losses, which according to the findings recorded on formulation No.6 
comes to Rs. 855 billion, out of which 65% was suffered by private 
persons, excluding complete loss of one additional Rabi Crop in 
Jaffarabad District of Naseerabad Division in Balochistan etc. 
9. 
 
Admittedly, post flood scenario had also not reduced the 
miseries of the people of Balochistan and Sindh. Inasmuch as, during 
the inquiry proceedings by the Commission, it had to send an interim 
report, in pursuance whereof directions were issued by this Court vide 
 
41 
order dated 28.03.2011 to the Chief Secretaries of the provinces of 
Balochistan and Sindh to pool their all resources and ensure without 
fail to complete the task of supply of water to the farmers in Dera 
Allah Yar and adjacent areas of province of Sindh so that the 
farmers/poor affectees may prepare their lands for cultivation of Kharif 
crop. Compliance report was received from the Chief Secretary 
Balochistan wherein it was stated that I&P Department, Government of 
Balochistan would ensure the supply of sufficient irrigation water for 
Kharif season during 3rd week of May, 2011. 
10. 
 
It seems that Federal and Provincial Governments had 
shown interest to extend immediate relief to the flood victims during 
the time when it was on its peak but subsequent thereto except 
disbursing an amount of Rs.20,000/- to each family for re-building or 
repair of houses on 50-50% basis (by the Federal and Provincial 
Governments) the disbursement of remaining amount has not been 
commenced so far. The victims, who suffered enormous losses, as is 
evident from the findings of the Commission, attached their 
expectations from the executive (Federal and Provincial Governments), 
and rightly so, as under Article 9 of the Constitution no person shall be 
deprived of life or liberty save in accordance with law. Therefore, it is 
duty of the government to protect their lives and properties and also 
decrease their miseries, which they have suffered during the flood 
2010.  Needless to observe that due to flood devastation, the rights of 
the affectees/victims guaranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution 
which speaks about inviolability of dignity of a man have also been 
violated. The pictures placed on record along with report by the 
Commission speak that how their dignity, etc. was compromised. This 
Court has interpreted the expression “life” being keyword in Article 9 
in a number of judgments including the case of Shehla Zia v. WAPDA 
(PLD 1994 SC 693); therefore, elaborate/detailed discussion on this 
aspect of the case is not necessary because though on account of the 
natural disaster the citizens in all the four provinces suffered dreadfully 
due to which neither their lives nor the property were safe but at the 
same time the executives could not be excluded from their liabilities to 
extend the fundamental right of life and liberty to them, for the 
reasons mentioned in the findings as well as recommendations of the 
commission, therefore, Government is directed to ensure payment of 
 
42 
balance of remaining amount, which is approximately Rs.80000/- per 
family as early as possible. 
11. 
 
In this context reference of encroachment in the chapter of 
recommendations which has already been reproduced hereinabove, 
may be made. It contains statement of facts because the illegal 
encroachments have been allowed to go unchecked by the concerned 
authorities due to negligence, corruption and poor management 
resulting in massive losses to life and property. It further adds that 
thousands of acres of “Kachha” lands have illegally been encroached 
upon by local influential persons or have been leased out on meager 
charges resulting in erection of private bunds. Construction of house 
and other built-up properties have been allowed along with river banks 
and canals, etc. Similarly, there has been a surge of encroachments on 
acquired land in pond area of barrages which aggravates the flood 
hazards. The natural flow of water has been blocked as a result of 
enormous encroachments in most waterways due to unplanned and 
illegal constructions. The findings of the Commission need no further 
proof, therefore, the concerned Provincial Governments through their 
Chief Secretaries, should immediately remove the same; even if need 
be, by adopting coercive measures through the law enforcing agencies, 
otherwise responsibility of any loss to life and property of the victim 
shall rest upon their shoulders with all its consequences.  
12. 
 
It is pertinent to mention here that how a poor farmer can 
have the courage to challenge the encroachers or violators of the 
Constitution and the law, in our society based on the feudal system 
like in Balochistan and Sindh, however, judicial notice of the same can 
conveniently be taken. Inasmuch as, such like members of community 
had no awareness about their rights and obligations, therefore, it 
becomes the duty of this Court to enforce their fundamental rights 
considering the same to be of public importance. Otherwise, the 
powerful and influential persons, with collaboration of the executive, 
will continue to deny them such rights without realizing that it is the 
liability of the State towards every citizen. Similarly, obedience to the 
Constitution and law is inviolable obligation of every citizen wherever 
he may be and of every other person for the time being within 
Pakistan. Denial of fundamental rights to downtrodden class has 
 
43 
become common phenomenon, therefore, the officers representing the 
respective governments are bound to fulfill their commitments under 
the Constitution by protecting the fundamental right of such like 
persons as it has been held in Syed Masroor Ahsan v. Ardeshir 
Cowasjee (PLD 1998 SC 823), Sardar Farooq Ahmed Leghari v. 
Federation of Pakistan (PLD 1999 SC 57).  
13. 
 
It is to be noted that in India as well as in Pakistan the 
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was resorted to due to denial of 
enforcement of fundamental rights to the persons who fall in the 
category of non-resourceful at the hands of resourceful. Thus, at this 
stage reference may be made to the case of Behar Legal Support 
Society v. Chief Justice of India (AIR 1986 SC 38) = [(1986) 4 SCC 
767] wherein Justice Bhagwati the great jurist opined as follows:- 
“The weaker sections of Indian humanity have been deprived of 
justice for long years; they had no access to justice on account 
of their poverty, ignorance and illiteracy. They are not aware of 
the rights and benefits conferred upon them by the constitution 
and the law. On account of their socially and economically 
disadvantaged position they lack the capacity to assert their 
rights, and they do not have the material resources with which 
to enforce their social and economic entitlements and combat 
exploitation and injustice.” 
 
Scope of the public Interest litigation has been explained by Justice 
Bhagwati in the case of State of Himachal Pradesh v. Student’s Parent 
Medical College Simla (AIR 1985 SC 910) = [(1985) 3 SCC 169], which reads 
as under:- 
 “Where the Court finds, on being moved by an aggrieved party 
or by any public spirited individual or social action group, that 
the executive is remiss in discharging its obligations under the 
Constitution or the law, so that the poor and the under 
privileged continue to be subjected to exploitation and injustice 
or are deprived of their social and economic entitlements or that 
social legislation enacted for their benefit is not being 
implemented thus depriving them of the rights and benefits 
conferred upon them, the Court certainly can and must 684 
intervene 
and 
compel 
the 
Executive 
to 
carry 
out 
its 
constitutional and legal obligations and ensure that the deprived 
and vulnerable sections of the community are no longer 
subjected to exploitation or injustice and they are able to realise 
their social and economic rights. When the Court passes any 
orders in public interest litigation, the Court does so not with a 
view to mocking at legislative or executive authority or in a 
spirit of confrontation but with a view to enforcing the 
Constitution and the law, because it is vital for the maintenance 
of the rule of law that the obligations which are laid upon the 
executive by the Constitution and the law should be carried out 
 
44 
faithfully and no one should go away with a feeling that the 
constitution and the law are meant only for the benefit of a 
fortunate few and have no meaning for the large numbers of 
half-clad, half-hungry people of this country”. 
 
14. 
 
In the instant case as well, no one amongst the sufferer 
had approached this Court although their miseries are quite evident 
from the contents of the report but admiration goes to the petitioners 
out of whom one is Member of Parliament (Ms. Marvi Memon) who 
filed petition under Article 184(3), whereas, Mr. Jan Muhammad 
Jamali, Deputy Chairman, Senate, Mr. Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim, Sr. ASC 
(Jurist) and so many others have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court 
for the enforcement of fundamental rights of general public of their 
respective areas. To our understanding the manner in which they 
cooperated with the Commission could not be else except that they 
had felt atrocities of farmers, etc. who had suffered and sustained 
huge losses as noted in the report, therefore, while entertaining these 
matters this Court is well aware of its constitutional obligation, 
namely, to ensure enforcement of the fundamental rights of victims 
and providing relief to them, and secondly, relief should be provided to 
those who suffered this calamity which was beyond our imagination, 
thus, we hope that this report will assist the Federal and Provincial 
Governments in evaluating their losses, as fairly as possible.  
15. 
 
The Inquiry Commission had compiled the report after 
having considered minute details and comprehensively recorded 
findings on all the formulation, which has arisen out of the pleadings of 
the parties, therefore, representing to all those sufferers whose life 
and 
property 
was 
not 
protected 
for 
the 
reasons 
mentioned 
hereinabove as well as in the report, which also includes criminal 
negligence on the part of officers/officials of the Irrigation Department 
of the respective governments in not maintaining the embankments 
(bands), etc. and failing to cause the breach of the same on specific 
places. Like the Ali Wahn Beraj was not breached at the specific places 
as a result whereof water had over topped and entered into Tehsil 
Allah Yar of District Naseer Abad, causing tremendous loss. It is not 
difficult to understand that what was the purpose of not breaching the 
Beraj from the specific place; obviously, to provide protection to some 
of the persons who had got vested interests. Had the Irrigation 
 
45 
Department fulfilled its duties as per the Irrigation Code, the flow of 
water towards Tehsil Dera Allah Yar could have been avoided. Be that 
as it may, as large number of victims in all the provinces are waiting 
for the findings recorded by the Inquiry Commission and the judgment 
on the same by this Court, therefore, it is important to note that such 
findings of the Inquiry Commission are to be implemented by the 
Federal and Provincial Governments following the codal formalities like 
registration of the cases of corruption, corrupt practices against the 
delinquents.  
16. 
 
With a view to disseminate the contents of the report in 
recognition of the fundamental rights of the citizens under Article 19-A 
of 
the 
Constitution, 
findings, 
concluding 
remarks 
and 
recommendations, simultaneously have been reproduced hereinabove 
in English and Urdu languages. 
17. 
 
As a result of above discussion, the findings, concluding 
remarks and recommendations are endorsed, accepted and hereby 
made part of this judgment with declaration that it will have binding 
effect on all concerned and sundry.  
18. 
 
Thus, accordingly following directions are issued:-  
 
(i) 
The Federal and Provincial Governments through 
Secretary Cabinet and Secretary Interior Division as 
well as Chief Secretaries of all the Provinces are 
hereby directed to implement the findings and 
recommendations of the report in letter and spirit. 
(ii) 
The report so prepared by the Commission shall be 
supplied, both soft and hard copies, to all concerned 
immediately. 
(iii) The Secretary Information of Federal and Provincial 
Governments 
are 
hereby 
directed 
to 
ensure 
publications of the findings and recommendations of 
the Commission and the instant order widely in print 
media as well as in electronic media in all the 
provinces and Islamabad Capital Territory in national 
and local languages.  
 
46 
(iv) The compliance report for our perusal in Chambers 
shall be sent fortnightly by the Chief Secretaries.  
19. 
 
Before parting with the judgment, we would like to express 
our gratitude to the Flood Inquiry Commission in producing their 
report in compliance with our order of 15th December, 2010 passed in 
these petitions brought before us, in the wake of the sufferings of 
persons who had to endure due to the floods swallowing up major 
parts of this country, damaging precious lives and valuable property. 
We would like to thank the Chairman of the Flood Inquiry Commission, 
Mr. Muhammad Azam Khan for chairing this Commission whose 
unfettered commitment made this report to see the light of the day, 
reflecting the colossal damage suffered by this nation. We would also 
like to thank the other three members of the Commission, including 
M/s Fateh Khan Khajjak, A.W. Kazi and Kh. Zaheer Ahmed for their 
determination and perseverance towards the completion of this task 
with their administrative skills, professionalism, commitment, devotion 
and dedication in not only unearthing the facts and circumstances 
surrounding this disaster suffered by the victims but also following the 
constitutional command that life and property of the citizen must be 
protected by the executive.  We would further like to acknowledge the 
backing provided by the Federal Government as well as the Provincial 
Governments by complying with the orders of this Court and assisting 
in the making of this report. We would also like to thank the Secretary 
Cabinet Division, Ms. Nargis Sethi for providing her assistance and 
collaboration in successfully composing this report. We must 
acknowledge the support provided by Mr. Sajid Mehmood Qazi, 
Additional Registrar of this Court/ facilitator of the Commission and his 
staff by assisting the inquiry Commission in accomplishing their task 
without any hindrance and providing them with all the necessary help 
required. We also acknowledge and appreciate gestures shown by the 
petitioners by invoking jurisdiction for the enforcement of the 
fundamental 
rights 
having 
public 
importance 
as 
discussed 
hereinabove. We feel that media persons had equally played effective 
role to unearth the sufferings of the victims of flood, 2010, therefore, 
we appreciate their efforts in this behalf as well.  
 
47 
20. 
 
For the foregoing reasons petitions are accordingly 
accepted.  
Chief Justice 
 
Judge 
 
Judge 
Islamabad,the 
7th June, 2011 
Nisar/* 
Approved For Reporting