SYED MUHAMMAD FAROOQ SHAH, J.--- Record shows that on 06.9.2016 none was in attendance on behalf of the petitioner. Today also the position is same. Neither the petitioner nor his counsel are in attendance.
2 Perusal of memo. of petition reveals that there is some civil dispute between the petitioner and respondents Nos,2 to 6, which cannot be looked into or considered by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution. No allegations whatsoever have been leveled against the official respondents.
3 Invoking of Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court instead of availing of remedy provided for under the relevant law would only be justified when the impugned order/action was palpably without jurisdiction as to force an aggrieved person in such a case to approach the forum provided under the relevant statute may not be just and proper. The extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution is equitable and discretionary and is to be exercised only where substantial rights of a party have been invaded in flagrant violation of law and which can be established without any comprehensive inquiry into the facts.
4. In this view of the matter, I constrained to hold that this petition arising out of factual controversy and for want of jurisdiction cannot be entertained by this Court, hence the same is dismissed as such. Pending application is also disposed of.