1. After hearing the learned counsel and perusal of the record it appears that there is controversy in respect to the interpretation of the agreement dated 1st July, 2007 whereby, contract has been assigned to Abdul Khalique, Respondent No,10 for receiving an amount of Rs,150 from every milking animal i.e, (Cows and Buffaloes) entering the limits of Karachi. The petitioner in both, the petitions have contended that even after receiving that amount CDGK is receiving an amount from the petitioner in respect to milching animals at yearly basis which factual positions has been denied by Mr. Manzoor Ahmed, Advocate for CDGK, as according to him after entering of milching animal to Karachi limits no further amount is collected and that the contract has only been awarded as there were confusion in complaints towards the payment of licence fee, therefore, to stop that one time method has been adopted A and that, too, through the contractor and in that way CDGK has also been benefited by handsome amount of Rs,4,50,00,000. The second contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the vaccination charges at the rate of Rs,50 from milching animal have also been received which the contractor has not been authorized.
2. ' Mr. Khursheed Hashmi, learned counsel for respondent No,10 submits that the respondent is entitled to receive Rs,50 for vaccination as in terms of two letters dated 29-6-2007 certain restrictions have been placed upon him that he will be bound to check the health certificate and thereafter allow the entry of the animal within the limits of Karachi.
3. ' Mr. Manzoor Ahmed, learned counsel for CDGK has stated that both the letters dated 29-6-2007 do not appear on record of CDGK and have been obtained by fraud and even the person who has issued these letters has been subjected to disciplinary action and has been suspended. He submits that at the moment they are not encouraging the receipt of the health certificate fee and are making arrangements for procuring the medicines as well as vets.
4. It appears that after the clarification from CDGK's counsel the contractor is entitled to payment and B receive Rs,150 from each and every milching animal while entering in Karachi is correct interpretation and his is being upheld. As far as the issue of receipt of Rs,50 is concerned, the contractor apparently is not entitled to receive as firstly both the letters above are seriously being disputed and secondly even in one of the letters it has been mentioned that the health clearance certificate to be issued by "Controlling Officer". Keeping these words in mind one cannot say that the health certificate can be issued by private persons or that the "Controlling Officer" can be an employee of the contractor even if these letters are relied upon then it can be interpreted that it was the duty of CDGK to arrange for vaccination of the animal through their Controlling Officer to ensure that vaccination has been effected and health certificate is issued, After above clarification nothing remains in these petitions and both are disposed of with observation in last para of this order.