FCC questions Supreme Court verdict ordering Monal Restaurant demolition

ISLAMABAD: The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on Thursday raised serious questions over a previous Supreme Court verdict that ordered the closure and demolition of the iconic Monal Restaurant in the protected Margalla Hills National Park, while hearing a review petition filed by the Capital Development Authority (CDA).

A three-member bench headed by Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi took up the petition challenging the apex court’s ruling. During the proceedings, the federal government supported the CDA’s request for a review of the judgment. However, the court declined an interim request by Monal’s management seeking the immediate reopening of the restaurant and instead focused on examining the legal basis of the original decision.

Justice Rizvi questioned whether due process had been followed before the Supreme Court issued its ruling, noting that several related cases were already pending before lower courts at the time. He observed that a dispute regarding the renewal of Monal’s lease was under consideration in a civil court, while intra-court appeals filed by other restaurants operating in the Margalla Hills area were still awaiting adjudication in the high court.

Representing Monal Restaurant, lawyer Ahsan Bhoon argued that the Supreme Court’s decision had effectively settled all ongoing litigation connected to the matter through a single order. Justice Rizvi asked why the issue of granting affected parties a fair hearing had not been raised more forcefully before the apex court.

During the exchange, the judge remarked that lawyers were expected to present legal arguments rather than remain silent observers. Bhoon responded that the legal teams had acted respectfully before the Supreme Court, similar to their conduct before the constitutional court.

The bench also observed that the CDA’s review petition had initially failed to identify substantial legal defects in the original judgment, prompting intervention by the Additional Attorney General on behalf of the federal government.

The state’s law officer informed the court that a new wildlife board law had been enacted in 2024 and said all stakeholders now agreed that the demolition order should be reconsidered, allowing the civil courts to decide the dispute on its merits.

Justice Rizvi, however, stressed that constitutional questions could not be resolved merely through consensus among lawyers. He remarked that courts were required to decide cases on legal principles and not on agreements reached by parties.

Read More: Pakistan economy grows 3.7% in FY2025-26 despite global challenges, says Aurangzeb

The judge also criticised aspects of the earlier ruling, questioning its reasoning and suggesting that it appeared to place greater emphasis on environmental considerations than on the rights of individuals and businesses affected by the decision.

Emphasising the importance of due process, Justice Rizvi said the constitutional court would not impose decisions on parties without hearing them fully. He added that any move to set aside a Supreme Court judgment would require a detailed and comprehensive ruling rather than a simple agreement between litigants.

After preliminary arguments, the FCC adjourned further proceedings until the second week of July and directed all parties to submit detailed legal arguments for consideration before the next hearing.