On Tuesday, the Supreme Court reserved its decision on petitions seeking a review of its June 11, 2024, ruling, which declared all leases and allotments within Margalla Hills National Park (MHNP) as contrary to the Islamabad Wildlife (Protection, Preservation, Conservation and Management) Ordinance 1979.
A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, along with Justices Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Naeem Akhtar Afghan, reviewed petitions from the Monal Group, Capital View Point Restaurant (La Montana), Sunshine Heights (Pvt) Ltd, and Brigadier (retd) Falak Naz Bangash of the defense ministry.
The Supreme Court’s March 21 judgement had instructed the Capital Development Authority (CDA) to list all leases in MHNP. An order on June 11 declared these leases invalid under the 1979 ordinance.
On August 21, 2024, the court directed the Islamabad Wildlife Management Board (IWMB) to take control of the Monal, La Montana, and Gloria Jeans restaurants in MHNP. It also instructed the CDA and Islamabad Capital Territory Police to assist in this process. The court mandated that entrances be barricaded, infrastructure demolished with minimal disruption, and debris properly removed.
Several review petitions were filed in response to this ruling.
During Tuesday’s hearing, CJP Faez Isa emphasized that the MHNP belongs to the people of Pakistan. Senior counsel Naeem Bukhari, representing Dr. Muhammad Amjad of La Montana, argued that the court’s order was issued without hearing his client’s side. He questioned the validity of the Metropolitan Corporation of Islamabad’s 2018 license fee increase if the CDA had not extended the license.
CJP Faez Isa criticized the CDA for its handling of the situation and expressed concern about the environmental impact of allowing restaurants in protected areas. He remarked on the need for accountability and the long-term consequences of such developments.
Brigadier Falak Naz from the defense ministry also appeared, expressing his distress over the court’s suggestion to initiate a court-martial against him.
