ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.

Constt: Petition No.D-   1090  of 2014

DATE                                     ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

 

1-     For KatchaPeshi

2-     For hearing of CMA.No.3646/2014 (Stay)

 

16th. February, 2016.

 

                        Mr. Muhammad AslamShahani, Advocate for petitioner.

                        Mr. ShahryarImdadAwan, Asstt: A.G.

 

                        Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that similar petitions have been disposed of by this Court including C.P.No.D- 3134 of 2013, hence requests that instant petition may also be disposed in similar terms. Learned Counsel placed on record copy of order dated 24.11.2015 passed in the aforesaid petition.

                        Learned Asstt: A.G after perusal of the order passed in the aforesaid petition submits that though the petitioner’s claim has not been acknowledged by the respondents, however, instant petition may be disposed of in terms of Para 5 & 6 of the order passed by this Court.

                        Accordingly, by consent instant petition stands disposed of along with listed application 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 in this account.”

JUDGE

JUDGE

A.R.BROHI