JUDGMENT

AKHTAR ZAMAN MALGHANI, J.-By this common judgment we intend to dispose of C.P. No. 86 of 2006 and C.P. No. 126 of 2006 as identical questions of fact and law are involved in both the petitions.2. Briefly stated, facts of' the case are that the petitioners are importers or clearing agents who import goods from Iran to Dry port Quetta. According to the petitioners vide public Notice No.1 of 2002, dated 25-7-2002 in order to streamline custom clearance work and to facilitate the trade at NLC Dry port/Railway Dry port Quetta a procedure was laid down whereby vehicles loaded with imported goods on their arrival at Tuftan entry point were allowed to proceed to Dry port Quetta alter delivering import manifest and fulfilment of the Customs Act, 1969 and on reaching of imported goods/consignment at A NLC/Railway Dry Port Quetta they were allowed to clear goods after payment of assessed tax/duties but on 1-3-2006 an office order was issued in supersession of previous orders/instructions whereby ...