ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.

Constt: Petition No.D-   1984  of 2012

DATE                         ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

1-     For orders on CMA.No.7750/2013 (U/A)

2-     For KatchaPeshi.

3-     For orders on CMA.No.7751/2013 (Contempt)

 

Before:- Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi&

            Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam- JJ

 

 

O R D E R

 

06th. April, 2016.

 

                        Mr. Mujeeb-ur-RehmanSoomro, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Shafique Ahmed Leghari, State Counsel.

 

                        Learned State Counsel has raised an objection as to maintainability of instant petition and also the contempt application filed on behalf of the petitioner, on the ground, that relief sought through instant petition, cannot be awarded to the petitioner, as it involves disputed facts, whereas, the petitioner is seeking implementation of contractual obligations, which cannot otherwise be enforced by filing a constitutional petition. Learned State Counsel further submits that under similar circumstances, similar petitions have already been dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court at Principal Seat headed by Hon’ble Chief Justice as well as by this Court, and has placed on record copy of order passed by this Court on 24.11.2015 in C.P.No.D- 3134 of 2013.

                        While confronted with such position, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner will be satisfied, if instant petition may be disposed of in terms of Para-5 & 6 of the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid petition. According, instant petition stands disposed of along with listed applications in the following terms:-

(i)                In view of herein above facts and circumstances of the case, and the aforesaid order passed by a Division Bench of this Court on the subject controversy, wherein, reliance has been placed on the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court i.eNizamuddin and others vs. Civil Aviation Authority (1999 SCMR 467) and Pak Com Limited and others Vs. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 2011 SC 44),  we are not inclined to entertain the disputed claims of petitioners which otherwise relate to some contractual obligation, therefore, instant petition is hereby dismissed for being not maintainable.

 

(ii)             However, before parting with the above order, we may observer that Government departments are required to be fair and responsive to all contractual  obligations, whereas, it is expected that the respondent may consider the claims of the petitioners strictly in accordance with law and shall ensure that the admitted outstanding amount against the respondent No.6, shall be paid to the petitioners within a reasonable period of time, whereas, efforts shall be made to get all the subject public works completed within stipulated period as per original scheme and the costs so determined, to avoid any revision of scheme i.e enhancement of cost, so that there shall be no loss to the public revenue on this account.”

 

 

JUDGE

JUDGE

A.R.BROHI