Article 61 The Supreme Appellate Court's jurisdiction over the matter came from a request by the Northern Area Legislative Assembly, which insisted that the Sadapara Dam project was approved at the diversion of the Shatong Nala, but the authorities rejected Excluded from turning The dam applicant had requested that the issue be made of national importance as per the original plan of diversion of Shutong Nala to the completion of Sadapara Dam, which concerned the implementation of basic rights of the people of Gilgit-Baltistan, Supreme Court of the Supreme Court. Is from Reviewing the matter, using its original jurisdiction, issued notices to the relevant authorities, subject to national and public interest, as per the original plan of the Sadapara Dam, the diversion of the Shetong Nala at the dam was not delayed indefinitely. Without the approval of the Legislative Assembly and the suggestion of Gilgit-Baltistan Sadapara Dam was a national interest project and the Shantong drainage was a permanent emission, resulting in drainage of the drainage. May be. And on the other hand, due to water scarcity, the dam was ultimately to no avail. In order to avoid national damage, the Supreme, Supreme Court of Appeal directed that the authorities turn on the Shotong Nala according to the original scheme. Must make sure. Was suspended
Related judgments — Supreme Appelate Court Gilgit, 2010
