Court Restores Monal Lease Dispute to Legal Process

APP

Islamabad: The Federal Constitutional Court has revived the legal process in the long-running Monal Restaurant case by overturning the earlier demolition order, ruling that the previous proceedings violated principles of due process and exceeded judicial authority.

In an eight-page judgment authored by Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi, the court held that the earlier decisions could not stand because the affected parties were not given a meaningful opportunity to present their case before adverse orders were passed.

The judgment noted that the dispute over the lease and ownership of the land occupied by Monal Restaurant was already pending before a competent civil court when the Islamabad High Court decided the matter through a constitutional petition. According to the court, the High Court’s intervention pre-empted the civil proceedings, while the Supreme Court later upheld that decision without addressing the underlying legal flaws.

The Constitutional Court observed that the previous rulings effectively bypassed the ordinary legal process, adding that the judiciary had reached final conclusions on disputed civil matters without recording evidence, a function reserved for civil courts.

It further ruled that the Islamabad High Court had also issued observations and ordered inquiries against several restaurants in the Margalla Hills that were not parties to the case, extending the scope of the proceedings beyond the matters under consideration.

The judgment stated that the Supreme Court, during review proceedings, also failed to provide the affected parties with an effective opportunity to be heard. It emphasized that judicial responsibility includes correcting legal errors to uphold constitutional guarantees and the rule of law.

The court also declared unlawful the earlier order cancelling all leases in the Margalla Hills, holding that the Capital Development Authority (CDA) has jurisdiction over the area. It additionally struck down the direction to transfer rental proceeds to the Wildlife Board.

The Constitutional Court concluded that the lease and ownership dispute would now be decided by the competent civil court on the basis of evidence, while observing that the Islamabad High Court had not carried out a proper legal examination of the relevant provisions of the Wildlife Act.