C.P
No. D – 2479 of 2011
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
For
Katcha Peshi.
25-01-2016
Mr. Dareshani Ali Haider
‘Ada’, advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Liaquat Ali Shar,
learned Additional Advocate General, Sindh.
.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
At the very outset, Learned
Additional Advocate General raised objection as to the maintainability of
instant petition and placed on record copy of order dated 24.11.2015, passed by
this court in C.P No. D-3134/2015 (Re: Pervaiz Ali Shah and others V.
Government of Sindh and others) and submits that the instant petition may
be dismissed. Copy of such order has been provided to learned counsel for the
petitioner, who submits that instead of dismissing instant petition, instant
petition may be disposed of in terms of para Nos. 5 & 6 of the order passed
by this Court in the aforesaid case.
Accordingly instant petition is
disposed of in the following terms.
“1. In view of hereinabove 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.e. Nizamuddin 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 petitioner which otherwise relate to some contractual obligation,
therefore, instant petition is hereby dismissed for being not maintainable.
2. However, before parting with the above
order, we may observe that Government Departments are required to be fair and
responsive to all contractual obligations, whereas, it is expected that the
respondents may consider the claims of the petitioners strictly in accordance
with law and shall ensure that the admitted outstanding amount against the
respondents, shall be paid to the petitioner 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.”
Petition stands disposed of in the
above terms.
JUDGE
JUDGE
N.M.