Islamabad: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday directed the Capital Development Authority (CDA) to submit a written response in a case challenging the collection of entry and parking fees in the New Blue Area. According to Beyond Time News, the court also ordered CDA to be made a party to the proceedings.
The hearing was conducted by Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir.
Dispute Over Authority of Fee Collection
The petition, filed by Advocate Tayyab, questions which civic body is legally empowered to collect charges in the New Blue Area.
During the hearing, lawyers argued over whether the Metropolitan Corporation Islamabad (MCI) or CDA holds jurisdiction over the system. It was noted that the Parking Regulations 2023 were approved by CDA and the mechanism is operating on CDA-controlled land.
Concerns Raised Over Transparency
Petitioner’s counsel Advocate Hazrat Younis urged the court to suspend the fee collection, raising concerns over transparency and the involvement of a private contractor issuing tickets.
He also sought clarity on how the collected funds are being managed and supervised.
Islamabad: IHC Moved Over Alleged Solitary Confinement of Bushra Bibi in Adiala Jail
Court Directions
Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir observed that no stay order had been issued in the matter and directed CDA to formally join the proceedings and submit its response.
The court noted that further clarification is required regarding the legal and administrative framework of the fee collection system.
Next Hearing
The case has been adjourned and will be heard again on June 29.
Conclusion
The inclusion of CDA marks an important step in the legal proceedings over entry and parking fees in Islamabad’s New Blue Area. The case will move forward once the authority submits its response.
FAQs
1. What is the case about?
It concerns the legality of entry and parking fee collection in the New Blue Area.
2. Which court is hearing the case?
The Islamabad High Court (IHC).
3. Why was CDA made a party?
Because of its role in approving parking regulations and overseeing the area.
4. What concerns were raised by the petitioner?
Issues related to transparency and the involvement of a private contractor.
5. When is the next hearing?
June 29.
