1. ' HAIDER ALI PIRZADA, J.--This is a stay application against recovery of Income Tax for the assessm ent year 1988-89. The petitioners have impugned the Assessment orders of the previous years and have filed a number of constitutional petitions which have been admitted by this Court for regular hearing, just like the present one. In some of the petitions, the petitioners were ordered to furnish security for the impugned amount whereas, in some of the constitutional petitions they were ordered to furnish bank guarantees. Against the order dated 5-3-1989 of this Court, the petitioners had filed Civil Petitions for leave to appeal, being K-155 to 157, in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court by an order dated 5-5-1987 had ordered that the petitioners may either furnish a bank guarantee or security to the extent of the amount of tax to the satisfaction of the Nazir of the High Court. This order was followed by a Division Bench of this Court in Constitutional Petition No,497 of 1987. It is advantageous to reproduce the relevant portion, which reads:- "In our view, since the Humble Supreme Court has passed the above order it will not be proper on our part to deviate from the same.
2. ' We would, therefore, order that the petitioner may either furnish a bank guarantee or security to the extent of the amount of to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this Court within one month."
3. However, Mr. Shaikh Hyder appearing for the Department and also holding brief for DA.G. Has submitted that Article 199 is not meant to short circuit or circumvent statutory procedures. He has further submitted that this Court has to show awareness of this fact that in a case like the present a Federal Government cannot function or meet its financial obligations if its source of revenue is blocked by an interim order restraining the respondent from recovering income tax. His submission is that this collection of public revenue has been seriously jeopardised budgets of Government. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the decisions reported in 12 Taxes 154, 40 I T R 338, 1962 (46) I T R 1023, 1963 (47) I T R 884. AIR 1953 Punjab 113, and 1981 PTD I.
4. In our view, since the learned counsel for the respondent did not raise any objection in earlier petitions and since the Humble Supreme Court has passed the order dated 5-5-1987 which has been followed by a Division Bench of this Court, it will not be proper on our part to deviate from the same. We would, therefore grant stay subject to Clause 4-A of Article 199 of the Constitution for a period of six months on either furnishing security or bank guarantee in the sum of Rs,93,78,467 to the satisfaction of Nazir of this Court within a period of four weeks.
5. ' The case may be fixed for regular hearing along with other connected cases.