C.P.No.D-1847 of 2013
For Katcha Peshi
06.05.2016
Mr.
Talib Ali Memon advocate
for petitioner.
Mr.
Gulzar Ahmed Malano holding
brief for Mr.Qurban Ali Malano
advocate for respondents 3, 4 & 6.
Mr. Shaharyar
Awan, 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.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 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.