1. ARBAB MUHAMMAD T AHIR, J . Through the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following relief:- "i. In the circumstances it is therefore, respectfully prayed that the respondents may kindly be directed to act in accordance with law . ii. An independent inquiry may kindly be conducted and petitioner may kindly allowed to access his personal belongings lying in his office. iii. Any punitive action without due course of law and with retrospective affect against the petitioner may kindly be set aside. iv. The respondents may kindly be directed to release the pension of the petitioner according to his post of Director BPS-19 (Cabinet Division Notification No. 5/3/2009-RA-I/F AB, dated 10th March, 2014) with all benefits without any delay .
2. 2- Precisely , the facts of the case are that the petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation stood retired from the service of the Frequency Allocation Board ('respondent-department') with effect from 25.01.2015 vide Notification dated 14.01.2015. He filed the instant writ petition on 21.03.2015 with the prayer to direct the respondent-department to conduct an impartial inquiry regarding allegations leveled against him through a criminal complaint; any unlawful action taken against him in that pursuit may also be declared null and void and that pensionary benefits admissible to the post of Director , BS-19 be paid to him with all outstanding dues.
3. 3- The respondent-department initially filed written comments on 29.04.2015 and subsequently additional written comments on 09.06.2015. Along with the said comments, about 45 documents have been annexed to show not only the service history of the petitioner , but also multiple litigation and orders thereupon by the superior courts. In addition, an application moved by the respondent department to the SHO, police station Sabzi Mandi Islamabad against the petitioner on the allegation of withholding office equipment/items after retirement wherein the local police recovered said items from the petitioner as reveals through receipt dated 1 1.03.2015.
4. 4- After hearing arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner , learned AAG and counsel for the respondent-department, record annexed with the petition and added subsequently through civil misc. application (CM 213 of 2022) has been gone through.
5. 5- Record reveals that while being in service as Director (P&R), the petitioner was proceeded against on the allegation of misconduct and pursuant to inquiry , major penalty of reduction to lower post i.e. Deputy Director Technical EG-30 was imposed with immediate ef fect vide Notification dated 23.12.2014.
6. 6- The record further divulges that the petitioner launched multifarious ligation against the respondent department wherein once he was also burdened with cost of Rs. 25,000/-by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2015 passed in WP No. 3534 of 2014 on account of filing frivolous petitions.
7. 7- The petitioner instead to mend his way, just after three days of the punitive action ibid, filed the instant writ petition on 21.03.2015 and commenced a new round of litigation which lasted for about seven years.
8. 8- During the pendency of instant writ petition, the respondent department released pensionary benefits of the petitioner as reveals through letter dated 05.06.2015 in his account maintained in the National Bank, followed by a Clearance Certificate dated 31.01.2021.
9. 9- Once again, petitioner came up with a new civil misc. application on 23.02.2 022 accompanied by a bulk of documents with altogether different prayer of setting aside the disciplinary procee dings together with its outcome whereby he was demoted, provision of pensionary benefits at par with BS-20 Director post and that too from the period of his service in erstwhile T & T.
10. 10- As mentioned above, grievance of the petitioner qua provision of pensionary benefits stood redressed way back in June, 2015 while through new civil misc. application, he intends to initiate a new round of litigation under the umbrella of instant writ petition with quite distinct and altogether dif ferent subjects.
11. 11- This Court in the case of 'Edwin Coe LLP v. Naseim Ahmed Sarfraz' (E.F.A. No.12 of 2018) has held that the Court would be loath to encourage unreasonable behavior leading to litigation or vexatious behavior prolonging litigation or abuse of the process of the Court tying up the time and resources of the court system in unnecessary litigation, resulting in overloading the justice system and causing delay in the adjudication of genuine disputes.
12. 12- Furthermore, in the case of Abdul Khameed v. Muhammad Shabbir , etc. (R.S.A No. 11 of 2017) it was held that due to frivolous litigation all components of justice system are clogged and consumed. This impedes access to justice for everyone by delaying adjudic ation of genuine grievances as well as depleting public resources that would otherwise be available to all components of the justice system for processing and adjudication genuine disputes. The cost incurred by the public exchequer due to frivolous litigation cannot be objectively estimated by a court, but such cost is certainly a conside ration to be born in mind by the court while awarding costs under section 35 and 35-B CPC.
13. 13- Having examined the case from every angle, the conduct demonstrated by the petitioner amounts to abuse of the process of the Court in tying up the time, resources in unnecessary litigation and deserves imposition of cost.
14. 14- Consequently , instant writ petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.50,000/- to be deposited in the Edhi Welfare Centre under due acknowledgment which shall be deposited with the Deputy Registrar Judicial of this Court for placing it on record of the instant file.