1. ' HAZIQUL KHAIRI, J.--The petitioners are engaged in purchasing, distributing, exploiting and exhibiting films in Pakistan. According to them, they are the owners of seven films, namely, Najma, Humayun, Anmol Ghari, Anokhi Ada, Andaz, Awaz and Aan, which were produced in India and were imported by them on outright purchase basis. Out of the said films, the first five were produced before partition by Messrs Mehboob Productions (Private) Limited of late Mehboob Khan, who was the real uncle of the attorney of the petitioner firm. These films were approved for an unrestricted exibition throughout Pakistan under the Cinematograph Act, 1918. However, upon the outbreak of war between India and Pakistan all certified films produced in India in any language were declared to be uncertified with immediate effect. After the war was over, the ban was not lifted. The petitioners thereupon filed a Petition No,1158/80 in this Court which was disposed of by a consent order dated 7-5-1981, to the effect that the Federal Government shall have no objection if the petitioners applied to the Central Board of Films Censors, respondent No,2 herein, for the certification of the films. It is averred by the petitioners that the respondent No,2 mala fide avoided to take a decision in this regard. The petitioners thereupon moved an application for contempt in the said petition which was dismissed on 11-10-1982 as it was held that there was no breach of the order of the Court dated 7-5-1982 However, pursuant to the order dated 7-5-1981 of the Court, the respondent No,2 required the petitioners to file import documents in respect of the said films and to file affidavit in Form B. The petitioners challenged it by a Constitutional Petition No,888/82 on the grounds that such a demand was mala fide and illegal. On 29-11-1983, the petition was allowed "to the extent that on petitioners' filling up all such blank spaces in the application and filling of the other documents except affidavit in Form B relating to import of the films, the respondents shall take all steps to consider the question of certification of these films at the earliest." In terms of the said order, the respondents were requested to process the matter and on their failure to do so, on 15-5-1984, the petitioners again moved a contempt application which was dismissed on 1-10-1984 in view of the contention raised by the respondents that the order cannot be given effect to as Martial Law Notification of 4th June, 1984 has completely banned exhibition of Indian Films.
2. Thereafter, the petitioners filed another Constitutional Petition No,69/86 in this Court challenging the vires of M.L.O. No,81 of 1980 and the Notification dated 4-6-1984 issued thereunder. This petition came up for final hearing on 22-8-1988 and the following consent order was passed thereon: "Respondent No,2 Central Board of Films Censors, Islamabad shall consider application filed by petitioners on 15-5-1981 for certification of film `Anmol Ghari' in terms of relief already granted and as stated in judgment dated 29-11-1983 in C.P. No,D-888/82. It would be satisfactory if this application is disposed of within three months from today."
3. ' The respondent No,2 failed to finalize the matter within three months from the date of the order.
4. However, on 21-11-1988 vide their letter, the respondent No,2 informed the petitioners that they had considered the petitioners' application and in view of general order contained in the Notification of June, 1984 the film "Anmol Ghari" cannot be certified for exhibition. Upon the receipt of this letter, the petitioners moved an application under section 151, C.P.C. In the said Petition No,69/86 seeking direction to the respondent No,2 to issue certificate to the petitioners. This application was dismissed vide order dated 8-12-1988 as follows:- "We are not inclined to grant interlocutory mandatory injunction directing the respondent No,2 for certification of film Anmol Ghari', which was banned more than 30 years back, as this will amount to the grant of one of the main prayers in the petition."
5. ' The petitioners challenged this order by a Petition No,24-K/89 before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, which was dismissed on 6-11-1989 with the observation that the order communicated by the letter dated 21-11-1988 by respondent No,2 furnished a fresh cause of action to the petitioners, which could not be challenged merely by a miscellaneous application filed in the earlier Constitution Petition No,D-69/86 which already stood finally disposed of and if the petitioners feel dissatisfied with, this decision they are still at liberty to file a fresh Constitutional petition before the High Court to challenge the said decision.
6. ' Accordingly the petitioners by this petition have challenged the decision contained in the letter dated 21-11-1988 of respondent No,2 refusing to comply with the order dated 29-11-1983 passed by this Court in Petition No,888/82 and the consent order dated 22-8-1988 passed by this Court in Petition No,69 of 1986.
7. ' It was candidly conceded by Mr. S.M. Noorul Hasan, learned counsel for the petitioners, that the cumulative effect of order dated 29-11-1983 passed in C.P. No,888/82 and consent order dated 22- 8-1988 passed in C.P. No, 69/86 is that by necessary implications the petitioners have abandoned/relinquished their claim in respect of all the motion pictures except "Anmol Ghari". At the same time it was contended by him that the respondents are bound to reconsider the petitioners' application for re-certification of the film and the legal objections now taken by the respondent No,2 in their letter dated 21-11-1988 cannot be gone into as the same were waived by them. Besides the said two orders dated 29-11-1983 and 22-8-1988 have attained finality. Mr. Shahoodul Hach learned counsel for the respondents, was not able to rebut this plea but maintained that in the face of preliminary Constitutional and legal objections, the firm "Anmol Ghari" cannot be certified for exhibition.
8. ' Admittedly, the wires of M.L.O. No,81 of 1980 was challenged by the petitioners in Constitutional Petition No,888 of 1982 and the Notification dated 4-6-1984 was also challenged by the petitioners in C.P. No,69/86. There is also no dispute that the respondents had attempted to justify de- certification of the film and pleaded legal bar to the maintainability of this petition in the face of KU/No,81 of 1980 and the notification dated 4-6-1984 issued thereunder read with Article 270-A of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. With this background, the respondents agreed to re-examine certification of the film "Anmol Ghari" on considerations other than those upon which its de-certification was made. Having waived the legal bar coming in the way of the petitioners, the respondents cannot be allowed to reagitate the same and we do not agree with A the learned counsel for the respondents Mr. Shahoodul Haq that despite the order dated 29-11-1983 passed in C.P. No, 888 of 1982 and the consent order dated 22-8-1988 the respondents can still raise the constitutional and legal bar to the maintainability of this petition.
9. ' These are the reasons for our short order dated 18-2-1991 whereby we had allowed this petition.
10. For the sake of convenience, we reproduce our short order which is as follows:-- "For reasons to be recorded separately, we allow this petition to the extent that it is declared that respondents are bound to take steps to consider the certification of film `Anmol Ghari' vide consent order dated 22-8-1988 passed by this Court in C.P. No,D-69/86 and further declare that the stand taken by them in their letter dated 21-11-1988 was not in furtherence of the said order. We accordingly direct the respondents to act upon the consent order dated 22-8-1988."