Land files in Gilgit-Baltistan often travel farther than the plots they describe. Chief Judge of the Supreme Appellate Court Gilgit-Baltistan, Justice Sardar Muhammad Shamim Khan, has admitted a civil petition by the Forest Department for regular hearing, converted it into an appeal, and suspended related lower-court orders until the next hearing — according to the Daily Independent.
The Hussainabad dispute
The matter concerns government land at Khachping Hussainabad. The court was told that two private parties had entered an agreement in Civil Suit No. 65/2011 on 14 March 2014 and later obtained an ex parte consent decree from the civil court. The Forest Department’s position is that the disputed land was state property and that the department had not been made a party to that agreement.
Advocate General Gilgit-Baltistan and Senior Advocate Aurangzeb Khan appeared for the Forest Department.
What the SAC put on hold
After hearing arguments, Justice Shamim Khan noted that the original civil case is still pending before the Civil Court Skardu, where the Forest Department and other government parties had yet to submit written responses, and that no final judgment had been issued.
The SAC accordingly suspended, until the next hearing, implementation of orders passed by the Chief Court, the District Judge Skardu, and the Senior Civil Judge Skardu.
Concern over eviction steps
The court expressed serious concern that — despite the original case still pending — the Senior Civil Judge had proceeded with alleged coercive measures and eviction proceedings against the Forest Department. The Independent reported the chief judge’s observation that the action appeared, prima facie, to lack legal justification and raised questions of possible mala fide intent.
Justice Shamim Khan directed the Senior Civil Judge Skardu to appear before the SAC in person and submit a written response.
Why it matters
Forest claims, “state land,” and eviction language touch livelihoods and settlement histories far beyond a single cause list. For now, the public record is procedural: petition converted to appeal, lower orders frozen, a judge summoned to explain. gilgiti-news will note the next hearing when a public order adds clearer next steps.