ship was approved by congress in 2005 Dec. did pakistan receive it yet?

http://www.nvr.navy.mil/nvrships/details/DD992.htm

Reserve Category X applies to ships and service craft that have been stricken from the Naval Vessel Register and are awaiting disposal by scrap, sale to foreign countries (FMS), designated target, memorial, or donation, as applicable.

USS Fletcher is currently docked on Pearl Harbor.

can someone explain why navy didnt accept it when it free of cost ???

It would've taken too many men to man (the PN isn't a large force), too much money to maintain (its not a brand new ship), and Pakistan wants to move away from depending on the US for its defense (hence why the F-16 deal is going to be the last major arms deal with the US).

Was Pakistan really going to get the VLS with tomahawks and sea-sparrows?

Well Duh! The VLS yes, as this is mounted, and also Seasparrow (standard on these ships since built) but clearly not (VL) Tomahawks.

Typically, there are three parts to any modern navy - surface fleet, submarine fleet and naval aviation. In naval power, India has had an overwhelming numerical superiority over Pakistan. However, Pakistan has the qualitative superiority in two of the three areas - submarines and aviation.

Pakistan's Agosta-90B submarines are more advanced than any of India's current subs... Pakistan's P-3C Orion planes give it a clear edge in terms of naval reconnaissance. India's surface fleet is still powerful, but the Spruance-class acquisition is a clear psychological edge for Pakistan. The Fletcher will tower over any Indian destroyer and has more advanced armaments. This is a clear attitude changer...

While Spruance-class vessels were originally built to hunt and kill enemy submarines under all weather conditions, they have since been modified to carry missiles. Each of these ships has a 61-cell vertical launch missile system capable of launching Tomahawk cruise missiles, as well as shorter-range Harpoon missiles. The ship also carries ASROC rocket-launched torpedoes that can home in on a submarine until it destroys it...

Experts baffled
Defense and naval experts are unsure about the rationale behind what they see as Pakistan's disproportionately large naval acquisitions from the US. The Spruance-class destroyer, they note, is an extremely capable ship, but may turn out to be too cumbersome for the Pakistan navy. Typically, smaller navies that are confronted by larger adversaries tend to focus on littoral defense as well as smaller anti-submarine capable vessels, they add.

While they do carry excellent anti-submarine capabilities, Spruance-class vessels have typically been used as escorts for American carrier-battle groups, which are offensive assets by design. These vessels are used to launch a barrage of missiles onto the adversary's targets near the coastline. It is to be noted that Pakistan is already set to receive advanced Harpoon-II missiles, which the Spruance-class destroyers are capable of launching. "If the Americans want to bolster Pakistan's naval defense against India, it is unclear why they are giving them a vessel that is clearly made to be used in offensive operations," one Western expert questioned.

Another curious aspect of the destroyer is that it would cost Pakistan an estimated $40 million annually just to operate the vessel. While Pakistan will likely get the vessel for free, it would still have to foot the bill for its operations. The Fletcher acquisition therefore seems to be similar to Pakistan's planned purchase of eight P-3C Orion planes, which, along with Pakistan's existing ones, seem to be an extraordinarily large number for the small navy that Pakistan has, some note.

Even Pakistani military officials have mentioned that Pakistan would be better positioned if it went for a couple of smaller but newer anti-submarine frigates instead of a Spruance-class ship, which the US has been eager to give to its allies since it began decommissioning them in the 1990s. It is unclear at this stage if such big-ticket items are meant to really help Pakistan's military, or if they are designed to be showpieces to quell anti-American sentiments inside Pakistan.

'Junk' for India?
... Amphibious Transport Docks are used to transport large numbers of troops over long distances by sea. The Indian navy, according to many, is in dire need of such vessels. However, the US offer of the Trenton has raised many questions.

The Trenton was commissioned in 1971 and is not considered to be in good shape. The United States Marine Corps' Expeditionary Warfare division, which uses Amphibious Transport Docks, has long complained of the Austin class vessels' problems, which include "poor habitability and deteriorating working conditions" among other things. One Indian observer bluntly called the Trenton "a piece of junk". To add to this, the US wants India to pay top dollar for this ship, unlike the grant given to Pakistan.

However, some contacts in Washington and New Delhi circles feel that the Spruance-class vessel transfer to Pakistan may be a precursor to a transfer of the advanced Aegis combat system for Indian ships, which can monitor vast areas of the ocean for other ships and air activities.

The Washington Post recently quoted Pentagon officials as saying that the US was considering the sale of the Aegis system and maritime patrol aircraft to India as a measure that would help Indian ships "monitor" China's activities in the Indian neighborhood and the strategic Malacca Strait. The contacts say that if India was willing to join up with the US-led global missile defense network, the Aegis was "there for India to buy". Given that sales of systems like the Aegis to India could provoke an apoplectic reaction in Islamabad, the US may be trying to soften up Pakistan by offering them goodies in advance, the reasoning goes.