ABDUL SHAKOOR, J.----Through the instant writ petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- "Keeping in view the facts, circumstances, and relevant legal submissions, it is requested that the impugned Tender dated 27.07.2021 (published on 29.07.2021) and the Impugned Withdrawal Letter dated 05.08.2021, may kindly be declared illegal, unlawful, per incuriam, against the applicable law and judicial principles, thus resultantly be set-aside.
It is further prayed that the Respondents be directed to hand over the charge of work back to the Petitioner.
As ad-interim relief, while suspending the Impugned Withdrawal Letter dated 05.08.2021, the Respondents be directed to hand over the charge of work to the Petitioner, till the final adjudication of the instant petition.
Any other relief deemed appropriate may also be granted".
2. The nitty-gritty of the case of the petitioner is that he participated in bidding process of Crane Handling Contract invited by the respondent No.3 through Tender Notice, which was accepted after due diligence and the contract was awarded to the petitioner under Public Procurement Regulatory Authority Rules, 2004. That, after Award of Contract, petitioner has deposited performance guarantee, but later on the petitioner comprehended his unlawful termination, so he approached the respondent No.3 for formal agreement despite Award of Contract which is a valid and binding contract. After being ignored, petitioner approached Lahore High Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn. Then petitioner approached the Civil Court, which issued Injunctive Order which restrained Pakistan Railway from interfering in the lawful business of petitioner. After that, respondent No.4 invited fresh bids, which is sheer violation of PPRA Rules, upon that the petitioner again approached to Lahore High Court through Writ Petition, where it came to surface that Award of Contract has been withdrawn, whereupon the respondents took plea of lacking territorial jurisdiction, hence they moved back to Civil Court. The petitioner proceeded to Civil Court about Impugned Withdrawal Letter with a pray that respondents are still proceedings in non-compliance and contempt of court. To avoid any technicalities, the Petitioner has sought the withdrawal of the Writ Petition before LHC for the fact that the Hon'ble Civil Court has already taken cognizance of the subject matter. But that too, has been violated by respondent No.4 in order to hand over the charge of work to petitioner, which left no other option to petitioner, but to approach this court through the instant writ petition.
3. Respondents were put on notice and were asked to submit their comments which they have accordingly submitted, whereas their stance is that the interim stay order of learned trial court has been impugned before District and Sessions Judge, Lahore, who suspended the Operation of the order passed by learned Trial Civil Court, thus there left no injunctive order to rely upon.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties in detail and perused the record.
5. It is admitted fact and that too is demonstrated clearly that the said case on the same subject matter is pending adjudication before the Civil Court at Lahore, and this court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the Constitutional Petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
6. It is pertinent to mention here that Civil Court after due consideration has passed an injunctive order vide order dated 06.07.2021, where order is given that it must not affect any other legal departmental proceedings. It is worth mentioning that while awarding certificate, it is envisaged from the letter that directions to deposit performance guarantee and execution of agreement within 10-days should be chalked out. Moreover, the impugned tender notice and withdrawal letter for fresh bids is challenged before Lahore High Court, but on the question of territorial jurisdiction, the petitioner moved withdrawal application for the said petition which was dismissed as withdrawn and the matter was laid down before Civil Court, which after interim order was challenged before District and Sessions Judge who has struck down the injunction order so rendered by the Civil Court; therefore, it led the path for the respondents for withdrawal of Award Certificate with direction to leave the premises within 02 days and let the petitioner to apply a fresh participant in fresh bidding process. Furthermore, in view of Order XXIII, Rule I, C.P.C., which excludes a person from instituting a fresh suit in respect of the same subject matter.
7. Reliance in such scenario is based upon 1999 SCM R 2380 and 2009 SCMR 238, wherein it is visible that when the petitioner's present case at the time of constitutional petition was filed in the High Court, and the petitioner's suit was already pending and on his own admission an interim order had been issued by the Civil Court, then in such eventuality, a question of res sub-judice emerges which makes this court bars that prior to give any finding in regard to the merit of the case, the subject matter of dispute had remained and is also still pending adjudication before a competent Civil Court of law.
8. For what has been stated hereinabove, we do not find any reason for indulgence of this Court to interfere in the matter by entertaining the instant constitutional petition when on the same point the civil suit is pending, hence the instant petition is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.