MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, J.- The petitioner is a Contractor for the collection of throughput charges on the freight at Lahore Airport. In this connection an agreement was entered into between the parties on 16.11.1999 in which it was averred thai a rate of throughout charges will be 2% of the freight charges approved by IATA. Now by virtue of letter dated 4.4.2000 .The petitioner has been asked to collect throughput charges at the rate of actual freight charges as mentioned in the Master Bill
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that after having Entered into solemn agreement with the petitioner, under which the petitioner was entitled to charge throughput charges at the rate of 2% of the freight charges approved by IATA, the respondents have no jurisdiction to direct that the charges should be collected at the rate or 2% of the actual freight charges.
3. Mr. Muhammad Saeed Akhtar, learned Deputy Attorney-General has raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of this petition which is that under Clause 34 of the agreement provides that in the event of any dispute arising, between the parties the matter has to be referred to the Director-General or the Deputy Director General, Civil. Aviation Authority and that the petitioner without invoking that forum has approached this Court.
4. There is considerable force in the objection raised by the learned Deputy Attorney-General.
Admittedly the relationship between the parties is contractual and not statutory in nature. Although it is true that this Court can in appropriate cases interfere even when the dispute relates to a contract, but as an equally efficacious ^remedy is provided by Clause 34 of the agreement, the petitioner should in the first instance have approached the Director General Civil Aviation Authority for the resolution of dispute.
In view of what has been said above., this petition is disposed of in the above terms. However, in order to save the petitioner from any loss, it is directed that the interim order passed by this Court on 19.6.2000 shall remain in force for a period of one month. If any application is filed by the petitioner that-shall be decided within one month. No- order as to costs.