GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN, PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

ORDER

' SH. RIAZ AHMED, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment and order, dated 30-11-1998 delivered by a Division Bench of the Balochistan High Court whereby a second appeal filed by the Government of Balochistan through Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department and Project Director, Akra Kour Dam Project, was dismissed.

2. The facts in brief are that the respondent instituted a suit for the recovery of Rs.18,00,000 against the Government of Balochistan and a firm known as M/s. Sadullah Khan & Brothers, In the Court of Kazi at Gawadur. It was averred in the plaint that the respondent Muhammad Ibrahim was awarded a contract for the collection of the octroi of Municipal Committee, Gawadur for the year 1992-93, but the same was terminated in February, 1993. It was further pleaded in the plaint that the plaintiff suffered a loss of Rs.1,800,000 on account of the octroi dues in respect of the material belonging to the Provincial Government. The suit was contested and the Government of Balochistan challenged the locus standi of the plaintiff to file the suit against the Public Health Engineering Department because the material needed by the Government Department was duly tendered and the contractor was responsible to provide the material required by the department.

In other words, the contractor was resonsible for the loss, if any, and not the Public Health Engineering Department. On the pleadings of the parties issues were framed and the evidence was recorded and at the conclusion of the trial the learned Kazi at Gawadaur decreed the suit vide judgment and decree, dated 10-12-1995. Aggrieved by the said orders, an appeal was preferred before the Majlis-i-Shoora, Makran Division under the provisions of Dasturul Amal Diwani, Kalat. The appeal was dismissed as barred by time vide judgment and decree, dated 28-12-1996: The said judgment was assailed through a second appeal taken to the Balochistan High Court, but same was also dismissed as barred by time.

3. The decree dated 10-12-1995 passed by the Kazi, Gawadur was challenged before the Majlis-I- Shoora on 23-5-1996. The said appeal was dismissed vide order dated 28-12-1996 and the petitioner filed an application for copies of the judgment on 22-1-1998, which were prepared and handed over the same day. The appeal was then filed on 8-6-1998 in.The High Court, i.e. After more than one and a half years of the dismissal of the appeal by the Majlis-i-Shoora.

3-A. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended before us that no limitation runs against a void order and the judgment and decree delivered by the Kazi was void ab initio. We fail to understand as to how this decree was void ab initio and the learned counsel could not enlighten us on this issue. Before the Majlis-i-Shoora, in the first appeal which was barred by time, no application for condonation of delay was filed and the petitioner was directed to affix the court-fee, which order was not complied with A despite number of opportunities provided to the petitioner to affix the court-fee. In this view of the matter, we are of the view that the appeal filed before the Majlis-i-Shoora by the petitioner was incompetent and was rightly dismissed as barred by time.

4. In the Balochistan High Court an application for condonation of delay was also moved in which it was stated that on account of the negligence of certain officials the delay of one and a half years had occurred in filing the appeal. We are not satisfied with this explanation because no detail of the negligence on the part of the officials concerned has been disclosed nor was it stated that the officials responsible for negligence had been proceeded against. In this view of the matter, the application seeking condonation of delay was rightly dismissed by the Balochistan High Court as no sufficient cause had been shown to explain the delay. A Provincial Government is at par with other litigants and no preferential treatment can be accorded to a Government in computing the limitation. Even otherwise, the learned counsel failed to point out any illegality in the judgment delivered by the learned Kazi at Gawadur. We do not find any merit in this petition. The same is hereby dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.