IHC Takes Up Appeal Against Islamabad Sheesha Cafe Ban
Division bench seeks replies and questions how NOCs were issued without formal rules as operators request suspension of the earlier judgment.
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court has taken up an intra-court appeal against a single-bench judgment prohibiting sheesha cafe operations in the federal capital, issuing notices to the respondents and seeking their replies.
A division bench comprising Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas and Justice Ayyaz Shaukat heard the appeal. Barrister Adil Aziz Qazi appeared for the appellants and requested immediate suspension of the earlier decision.
The supplied hearing account records the issuance of notices and adjournment of proceedings. It does not record an order suspending the ban or allowing sheesha operations to resume.
Operators Seek Interim Relief
Qazi requested that implementation of the single-bench decision be suspended until the appeal was decided. He specifically sought suspension of paragraph 30 of the judgment.
He submitted that the appellants had invested substantial sums, amounting to crores of rupees, after obtaining no-objection certificates from the administration.
The lawyer argued that the operators should be permitted to conduct business under those permissions. He also requested that their restaurants and cafes be allowed to continue other lawful activities.
Responding to the request for an immediate suspension order, Justice Minhas indicated that the bench would pass an order on the matter. The hearing account does not establish that the requested relief was granted.
Bench Questions Basis of NOCs
Justice Minhas referred to an earlier Islamabad High Court decision that had also called for rules governing sheesha cafes.
He questioned how the administration had issued NOCs when the necessary rules had not been framed and earlier judicial directions existed.
Qazi responded that the administration had issued the certificates and that his clients were seeking permission to operate on their basis.
The bench indicated that the respondents’ replies would help establish how those permissions had been granted.
Justice Minhas also observed that two earlier decisions of the high court had not been challenged, while the regulatory framework remained incomplete.
Background to the Dispute
The appeal follows months of litigation over the legal status of sheesha operations in Islamabad and the administration’s use of temporary permissions.
In September 2026, the district administration told the high court that NOCs were being issued under an interim arrangement pending approval of formal rules by the federal government. According to its response, sheesha service was restricted to open, uncovered areas and required a separate terrace permit from the relevant assistant commissioner. The court directed authorities to formulate regulations within a month.
An earlier September written order conditionally protected lawfully operating permit holders from coercive action.
However, the subsequent detailed judgment reported in October took a broader restrictive position. Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar directed that commercial sheesha operations remain prohibited until the relevant rules were finalised and enforced.
The judgment also covered establishments holding existing NOCs, which were to be treated as withdrawn. It questioned the use of administrative permissions to authorise operations without the required regulatory framework.
The court noted that the proposed Sheesha Rules 2023 had not been finalised despite repeated consideration and revisions. It also referred to non-implementation of an earlier IHC order issued in 2022.
Following the October written decision, the Islamabad administration announced intensified enforcement. APP reported that officials were conducting daily operations, sealing cafes and confiscating equipment in areas including E-11 and Bahria Civic Centre. Those measures were described by the administration as implementation of the court’s directions.
Appeal Admitted, Suspension Not Recorded
The latest proceedings bring the cafe operators’ challenge before a two-judge bench, with the validity of administrative permissions and the absence of formal rules central to the dispute.
The appellants’ request to continue other lawful restaurant activities is a separate question from permission to serve sheesha. Neither request should be reported as having been granted on the basis of the supplied hearing account.
The division bench issued notices, sought replies and adjourned the hearing. No next hearing date was specified in the account provided.
