How was a decree for the allotment of plots issued when there was neither an award nor any record of the plots?
By Editor Investigation, Sub News
Islamabad, August 25,2026: Activities of an alleged “Shamilati Group” within the CDA’s Land Directorate are beginning to surface, with its alleged operatives reportedly keeping the Member Estate within their sphere of influence in an effort to conceal their activities.
According to documents available with Sub News, an alleged plot scandal involving properties worth more than Rs1.5 billion in the CDA’s Land and Estate Departments came to light when a former Director Land and former Deputy Director learned that a court decree had been obtained regarding plots against a claim identified as 101 BUP, and pressure was subsequently being exerted on the former Director and Deputy Director to implement the decree.
When the revenue record was checked in this regard, it emerged that the claim in the name of Safia Begum concerning Mouza Badia Qadir Bakhsh had been decreed by the court, although there was neither any award nor any record of the claimed land. The record also did not contain any evidence of possession having been received against the claim.
In view of these facts, and on the instructions of the former Deputy Commissioner and Director Land, the former Deputy Director Land referred the case to the Board along with all the relevant facts. The case sent to the Board also bears the signatures of Member Estate Muhammad Zaman Wattoo. The case was discussed in the agenda of the Board meeting held on July 3, but its decision has yet to be made public.
It is pertinent to mention that when alleged associates of the “Shamilati Group” learned that the former Director and Deputy Director had sent recommendations against implementation of the decree rather than supporting its implementation, the issue concerning the allotment of five plots in G-10 was raised in the media, which may have been an act of the alleged group itself.
It is also pertinent to mention that the letters in question had been signed by officers two years earlier, and their implementation had already been stopped. After the alleged activities of the group were obstructed, it was allegedly decided to provide the Member Estate with incorrect information so that the former Director and Deputy Director could be removed. However, neither the Member Estate nor the Land Directorate confirmed any kind of allotment in G-10.
The matter nevertheless raises serious questions requiring investigation: how was a decree obtained in favour of the claimants when the relevant record was not clear? Why did the CDA’s Law Wing fail to defend the matter? Was a petition filed against the decree? Questions have also arisen over the decision of the incumbent Member Estate to take the matter to the Board instead of ordering an inquiry.
It is also a matter of record that if the CDA Board issues orders for allotment in the above-mentioned case, all Board members would bear responsibility for such a decision. The Sub News Investigation Cell will soon bring the names of the alleged masterminds and associates of the “Shamilati Group” into the public domain, along with evidence.
