Islamabad Parking Fee Case: IHC Directs CDA to Join Legal Proceedings
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has directed the Capital Development Authority (CDA) to become a party in a case challenging the collection of parking charges in Islamabad’s New Blue Area. The court also issued notices to the relevant authorities and sought written responses regarding the legality and management of the fee collection system.
Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir heard the petition, which questions the authority responsible for collecting parking fees and the use of the funds generated from the process. Representatives of both the petitioners and the Metropolitan Corporation Islamabad (MCI) appeared before the court during the hearing.
CDA Asked to Clarify Its Role
During the proceedings, MCI counsel Advocate Kashif Malik argued that the MCI was not collecting parking fees in the New Blue Area. Instead, he told the court that the CDA was collecting the charges under the Parking Regulations 2023 approved by the CDA Board.
He explained that the designated parking area falls within CDA’s approved development plan. According to him, the authority collects fees on CDA-owned land and not on public service roads. Therefore, he maintained that the CDA is directly responsible for the parking fee mechanism in the area.
Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir observed that although the CDA had issued directions regarding fee collection, it had not been formally included in the case. As a result, the court ordered the CDA to join the proceedings and submit its position.
Court Seeks Written Replies
Counsel for the petitioners requested the court to suspend parking fee collection until the matter is decided. They argued that authorities had not clearly explained how the collected funds were being utilized. In addition, they claimed that a private contractor was issuing parking tickets without sufficient public clarity.
However, the judge noted that no stay order had been issued so far. He questioned why concerns were being raised before the court had reached a conclusion.
The court directed all respondents to submit written replies and sought a detailed response from the CDA. It then adjourned the hearing until June 29, when further arguments and official explanations will be reviewed.
