They have filed applications for leave to appeal against last month’s Court of Appeal ruling to quash a development order.
Lawyer B Thangaraj, who is appearing for DBKL, said 27 questions of law were framed and submitted in the Federal Court last week.
“Most of the legal questions revolved around planning laws,” he said, adding that the Federal Court registry had fixed case management on March 25.
The lawyer said the hearing of the leave application could be heard soon as the Court of Appeal had prepared its written grounds.
Memang Perkasa Sdn Bhd and Yayasan Wilayah Persekutuan (YWP), a foundation chaired by the federal territories minister, have filed about 30 questions while Taman Rimba Kiara longhouse residents association, 14.
The apex court will hear the merit of the appeal only if the questions raised are novel and of public importance.
On Jan 27, a three-member bench at the Court of Appeal allowed Taman Tun Dr Ismail (TTDI) residents’ appeal against the government’s plan to develop Taman Rimba Kiara.
Judge Mary Lim Thiam Suan, who delivered the verdict, said there is an “appealable error that warrants an appellate intervention”.
“We now set aside the High Court order on Nov 28, 2018,” she said, referring to its decision to reject an appeal by the residents to overturn the conditional planning permission and development order by DBKL.
The other judges who sat with Lim were Has Zanah Mehat and M Nantha Balan.
The residents had appealed against the proposed development of the Taman Rimba Kiara project, consisting of a 29-storey apartment block with 350 units of affordable housing, as well as eight blocks of service apartments and eight storeys of parking facilities.
The project was to be undertaken by property developer Malton Bhd, through its subsidiary Memang Perkasa and YWP.
Lim said the residents had the legal standing to file the judicial review against the local authority on grounds that they are aggrieved parties over the proposed development in their neighbourhood.
“It is undeniable that the development will directly and indirectly affect them in terms of the value of their properties, traffic condition and the magnitude of development that has an impact on the population density,” she said.
Lim said the mayor owed a duty under the common law to notify and hear objections by residents on any proposed development under his jurisdiction.
On the justification of “relocating longhouse residents living around Taman Rimba Kiara” cited by the mayor in approving the development order, Lim said the court could not agree with his reasoning.
“We do not see how the longhouse residents’ matter can be taken into consideration by the mayor. It is a legacy from politics.
“This proposed development in reality is purely a commercial joint venture between YWP and Memang Perkasa,” she added.
The residents were represented by Gurdial Singh Nijar, Christopher Leong and Alliff Benjamin Suhaimi. Cecil Abraham appeared for YWP and Memang Perkasa.
Harpal Singh Grewal represented the Taman Rimba Kiara longhouse residents’ association.