' MAMOON KAZI, J.---The petitioners in these two petitions have called into question the judgment of the High Court of Sindh, dated 28-10-1998. The circumstances of the case indicate that, Muhammad Hashim, who is the petitioner in C.P.L.A. No,748 of 1998 had been, by an agreement, appointed Octroi contractor for the period from 1-4-1996 up to 31-3-1997 to collect octroi on goods imported by Sandoz (Pak.) Ltd., who are the petitioners in C.P.L.A. No,764 of 1998. Subsequently, the petitioner, Muhammad Hashim, sought declaration from the High Court of Sindh through Constitutional Petition No,523 of 1996 to the effect that he was the lawful holder of octroi lease for the said period. The said petition was however, dismissed as it was, inter alia, found that the contract entered into by the petitioner had already expired.
2. Mr. Abdul Rahim Kazi, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that although, there can be no cavil with the view expressed by the High Court after the period of validity of the said contract had already expired, the petitioner, Muhammad Hashim, was not entitled to specific performance of the said contract but, according to the learned counsel, the petitioner should have been permitted to seek other legal remedies against the respondents Nos.1 and 2 which were available to him under the law. The view expressed by Mr. Akhtlaq Ahmad Siddiqui learned Advocate-on- Record appearing for the other petitioners also does not appear to be different.
3. In view of the circumstances of the case although, the petitions were dismissed as having become infructuous, but the right of the petitioners to seek any other appropriate remedy available to them under the law cannot be denied to them.