The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has ordered the de-sealing of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa House in Islamabad. The decision was made by Chief Justice Amir Farooq, who presided over a hearing involving a petition filed by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) government. The case revolved around the sealing of the KP House by the Capital Development Authority (CDA), which claimed that illegal construction had been carried out on the premises and that certain dues were still outstanding.
Background of the Case
The controversy surrounding the KP House in Islamabad has been ongoing for several years. According to the CDA’s legal team, the first notice regarding the issues at KP House was issued in 2014, raising concerns about illegal construction and unpaid dues. Despite this, the KP government argued that the CDA’s decision to seal the provincial property was unjust and excessive.
Hearing in the Islamabad High Court
During the hearing, the CDA’s lawyer provided arguments supporting the sealing of KP House. The lawyer asserted that the property had undergone unauthorized construction and that there were still financial obligations that needed to be cleared. According to the CDA, these issues were not new, as the lease of the property had expired in 2014, and the first formal notice was given that same year.
Justice Amir Farooq, however, raised concerns about the CDA’s approach. Addressing the CDA’s lawyer, he questioned the manner in which the authority had acted. Justice Farooq emphasized that the CDA should not appear to be unfairly targeting any specific party or acting in a high-handed manner. He advised the authority to adhere to legal procedures and issue proper notices before taking drastic steps like sealing provincial property. “If there are any issues, follow the legal process and issue the appropriate notices,” he remarked during the hearing.
Legal Questions and Concerns
One of the key issues discussed during the hearing was the legality of the CDA’s actions, particularly its failure to issue a notice before sealing KP House. Justice Farooq expressed disapproval over the fact that a provincial property had been sealed without following proper legal procedures. He noted that while the CDA might have legitimate concerns over the construction and dues, sealing a property that represents a provincial government without first providing notice was an excessive action.
“It is shameful to seal a provincial house without following the proper procedure,” said the Chief Justice. He further noted that the CDA should have issued a notice prior to sealing the house. In light of these procedural lapses, the court ordered the immediate de-sealing of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa House.
CDA’s Defense and Response
In defense of its actions, the CDA’s counsel reiterated that the lease of the KP House had expired in 2014 and that the authority had been trying to address the issues related to illegal construction and unpaid dues for nearly a decade. According to the CDA’s legal team, they had issued multiple notices over the years, but the issues remained unresolved.
Despite these explanations, the court sided with the KP government’s position, emphasizing the need for adherence to legal protocols in such matters. The court’s ruling highlighted the importance of issuing proper notices and providing the other party with the opportunity to address concerns before taking extreme measures like sealing government property.
The Islamabad High Court’s decision to order the de-sealing of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa House is a significant legal development, particularly in the context of disputes between provincial governments and federal authorities like the CDA. The court’s ruling underscores the importance of due process and the need for government agencies to act in accordance with the law when dealing with sensitive properties, especially those representing provincial interests.
Chief Justice Amir Farooq’s order not only provides relief to the KP government but also serves as a reminder to the CDA and other regulatory bodies to ensure that they follow the legal procedures laid out for property disputes. In this case, the failure to issue a notice before sealing the KP House was seen as a major procedural oversight, leading to the court’s decision to order the immediate de-sealing of the property.
The court’s decision will likely have broader implications for how future disputes between provincial governments and federal authorities are handled, particularly with regard to provincial properties located in the federal capital.
