1. In this Constitutional petition, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:--
(a) declare that refusal to grant exemption backed by Government Notification is violative of fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Arts. 4, 18 & 23 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973:
(b) declare that the regulatory duty is nothing but a custom duty levied vide S.R.O. 1050(1)/95, dated 29-10-1995 hence not sustainable in law during the operation of exemption already available to the petitioner under S.R.O. 349(1)/85, dated 15-4-1985;
(c) declare that regulatory duty cannot be levied on goods already exempted unless the said exemption is specifically withdrawn;
(d) direct the respondent (1, 2 and 3) to refund the regulatory duty amounting to Rs,2,523,935 collected without authority of law and jurisdiction;
(e) grant cost of petition;
(1) grant any other relief/reliefs as deemed appropriate in the circumstances of this case. Messrs Sajjad Ali Shah, learned Standing Counsel and Mr. Raja Muhammad lqbal, learned Advocate for the respondents made a statement that the issues involved in this Constitutional petition have been decided by this Court in a large number of petitions being Constitutional petitions Nos.D-519, 535, 793. 794, 795. 797, 856 and 952 of 1997 and requested that this Constitutional Petition may also be dismissed in view of the observations made in the said judgment. It will be useful to reproduce the operative portion of the said judgment, which is as under: "For the foregoing reasons. It is held that in consonance with the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Customs v. Ravi Spinning Mills Ltd., the regulatory duty imposed vide S.R.O. 1050(1)/95 has been validly levied to the goods imported by the Petitioners. All the petitions stand dismissed accordingly." Mr. Aziz A. Shaikh, learned Advocate for the Petitioner submitted that the petitioners in those Constitutional petitions have assailed the judgment of this Court dated 15-3-2002, therefore, the impugned judgment of this Court cannot be said to have attained finality and could not be relied upon for deciding the present petition. We are not in agreement with Mr. Aziz A. Shaikh in view of the fact that so long as the impugned judgment is not set aside or modified, the pronouncements and observations made therein will be applicable to a petition/case wherein similar issues and disputes are involved. For the foregoing reasons we are of the view that this Constitutional petition can be decided on the basis of the judgment in C.P. No,519/1997 and several other petitions. Accordingly, this Constitutional petition stands dismissed with no order as to costs.