C.P.No.D-697 of 2012

 

For KatchaPeshi

 

 

27.04.2016

 

 

Mr.Muhammad Ibrahim Gambhir holds brief for Mr.AjeebullahJunejoadvocate for petitioner.

Mr. ShaharyarAwan, Assistant Advocate General.

..................

 

                        Learned AAG has raised an objection with regard to maintainability of instant petition as according to him, through instant petition, the petitioner is seeking implementation of contractual obligation, whereas, this Court has already disposed of similar petition being CP No.D-3134/2013.In support of his contention learned AAG has placed on record copy of such order and submits that instant petition may also be disposed of on same terms.

                        Accordingly instant petition is disposed of in terms of para 5 & 6 of the aforesaid order passed by this Court in aforesaid petition, whereas, para 5 & 6 of such orders are reproduced hereunder:

“5.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.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, being not maintainable.

 

            6.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 petitioner 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.