ISLAMABAD, Oct 12 (APP):The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Monday issued notices to respondents to an intra-court appeal challenging a decision to establish an international cricket stadium and sports arena in Islamabad. The federal government, Capital Development Authority (CDA), Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) were among those who were served notices. A division bench comprising Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas and Justice Shahrukh Arjumand heard the appeal filed by Hameed Nawaz and Muhammad …
IHC seeks replies on case against stadium project in capital
ISLAMABAD, Oct 12 (APP):The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Monday issued notices to respondents to an intra-court appeal challenging a decision to establish an international cricket stadium and sports arena in Islamabad.
The federal government, Capital Development Authority (CDA), Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) were among those who were served notices.
A division bench comprising Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas and Justice Shahrukh Arjumand heard the appeal filed by Hameed Nawaz and Muhammad Khurram Javed against a single bench ruling dated September 22, 2026.
The court also sought responses from the Ministry of Climate Change, the Islamabad chief commissioner and the chairperson of the Islamabad Wildlife Management Board.
In their appeal, the petitioners stated that land in Zone III of Islamabad, including Sector D-12 and the village of Shah Allah Ditta, was intended to be used for the project.
They argued that the project required an assessment of its potential impact on the environment, wildlife and natural landscapes, as well as consideration of relevant international laws and the United Nations’ global charter.
The appellants said the government had designated 82 wildlife sanctuaries across the country and protected 954,246 hectares of land in 10 national parks, including Margalla Hills National Park.
According to the appeal, land in Sector D-12 was initially allocated for the construction of a stadium, but the project was subsequently expanded into an Olympic village comprising a football ground, hockey stadium and other sports facilities.
The petitioners contended that the expanded project required substantially more land than originally allocated, with approximately 175 acres planned for development.
They argued that the project could harm natural resources, landscapes, biodiversity, ecosystems and wildlife, alleging that a green area was being converted into a built-up zone.
The appellants asked the court to set aside the single bench’s September 22, 2026, decision and declare the allocation of land for the cricket stadium unlawful.
They also sought to have the electronic bidding process, procurement proceedings and all related arrangements for the land declared illegal and set aside.
