Bahria Town faces regulatory action as CDA, RDA and NAB move against projects

Bahria Town is facing regulatory and legal action on multiple fronts as authorities in Islamabad and Rawalpindi continue

ISLAMABAD / RAWALPINDI: Bahria Town is facing regulatory and legal action on multiple fronts as authorities in Islamabad and Rawalpindi continue proceedings involving its housing projects, development approvals, alleged encroachments and properties linked to ongoing accountability investigations.

The developments involve the Capital Development Authority (CDA), Rawalpindi Development Authority (RDA) and National Accountability Bureau (NAB), with separate proceedings concerning Bahria projects in Islamabad and Rawalpindi.

CDA action in Bahria Enclave

The CDA’s official record lists Bahria Enclave Phase-I in Zone-IV with an area of 12,543.11 kanals. The authority currently shows the layout plan as approved but the NOC status as not issued.

CDA proceedings have focused on the development and expansion of the scheme beyond approved planning parameters. The authority has also issued show-cause notices concerning the project.

According to documents cited in the proceedings, CDA has raised objections over alleged development in areas not covered by the approved layout plan, changes involving reserved spaces and other planning violations. The authority has also maintained that required approvals must be obtained before development, marketing or sale activities.

CDA’s public record further shows that in May 2026 it issued a notice concerning transfer of land falling under a graveyard in Bahria Enclave-I to the authority.

RDA proceedings in Rawalpindi

A separate regulatory front has emerged in Rawalpindi, where the RDA has taken action concerning Bahria Town projects.

RDA records have previously listed an FIR involving Ali Riaz, identified as Chief Executive of Bahria Town, along with other officials in connection with Bahria Town Phase-VIII in the Rawat area. The published RDA record identifies FIR No. 1386/2025 and names Ali Riaz and other Bahria officials among the persons cited in the case.

The proceedings relate to allegations concerning development and planning violations. Such allegations remain subject to investigation and judicial proceedings.

RDA has also taken enforcement action against buildings and structures it considers unauthorized and has continued proceedings against housing schemes over alleged violations of development regulations.

NAB auction proceedings

The third major development involves NAB proceedings concerning properties allegedly linked to an accountability investigation.

According to the details provided in the case material, NAB has announced an auction involving commercial properties with a combined reserve value of approximately Rs 5.62 billion. The assets include commercial plots associated with Bahria Town in Rawalpindi as well as The Aquatic Mall in Mouza Humak, Zone-V.

The reported auction is scheduled for October 6, 2026, at the G-6 Civic Centre in Islamabad.

The proceedings form part of the investigation titled “Investigation Against Al-Bari Group & Others.” The auction and recovery process are subject to the relevant legal and accountability proceedings.

Regulatory scrutiny intensifies

The developments indicate increased scrutiny of private housing schemes over layout approvals, NOCs, land use, development permissions and recovery proceedings.

For potential buyers and investors, the regulatory actions highlight the importance of checking the approval and NOC status of housing projects directly through the relevant development authority before purchasing property.

CDA’s current housing-scheme database provides project-specific information on layout-plan approval and NOC status, including Bahria Town projects.

Meanwhile, the separate proceedings by RDA and NAB demonstrate that regulatory, criminal and accountability matters involving housing projects can proceed simultaneously under different legal frameworks.

The cases against Bahria Town officials and properties remain subject to the findings of investigating agencies and courts. Any allegations made by regulatory or accountability authorities should therefore be distinguished from facts established through final judicial decisions.