GAUL AM HUSSAIN vs QADAR KHAN
This matter concerns a review petition filed against a judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan dated 10th April 1978, which involved a pre-emption dispute. The petitioner sought a review on the grounds that the area in question, Jangal Khel, had been historically treated as part of the Kohat Municipality since 1892, that a Civil Judge had previously declared it an urban area, and that a 1954 Notification by the N.-W.F.P. Government included the area within municipal limits. The core legal question was whether these grounds justified a review of the previous judgment. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the arguments raised were merely attempts to re-argue the case, which falls outside the scope of review jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Court noted that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the specific land in dispute was definitively located within the municipal limits of Kohat City based on the provided Gazette Notification. The principle laid down is that a review petition cannot be used as a mechanism for the rehearing of a case or to re-litigate points already adjudicated upon by the Court.
- Can a review petition be used to re-argue points already decided in a previous judgment?
- Does the scope of review jurisdiction permit the rehearing of a case on its merits?
ORDER
1. ' G. SAFDAR SHAH, J.-In seeking the review of the judgment of this Court, dated 10th April, 1978, Mr. Afzal Muhammad Bangash, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that (1) since the inception of the Kohat Municipality in 1892, Jangal Khel was being treated as a part of the aforesaid city and had lost its rural trappings ; (2) that by a judgment of the Civil Judge, Kohat, Jangal Khel was found to be an urban area ; and that (3) in view of the Notification No, 4251-LC, dated 11th June, 1954, published under the authority of the N.-W.F.P. Government, Jangal Khel was declared to be a part of the Municipal limits of the Kohat City.
2. ' His grievance therefore is that in view of the said material brought on the record of the case, the judgment delivered by this Court on 10th April, 1978 is illegal, and hence liable to be reviewed. We are afraid there is no force in this contention. Each one of the said grounds urged by the learned counsel have been elaborately dealt with in the judgment of this Court. And consequently what the learned counsel is evidently seeking is the rehearing of the case on these points which clearly lie beyond the scope of the review application. Now this being a case of pre-emption, we pointedly questioned the learned counsel to point out from the aforesaid Gazette Notification of the N.-W.F.P.
3. Government if the land in dispute did fall within the Municipal limits of Kohat City, but he .Frankly - confessed to his inability to do so, and quite rightly, because by going through the Gazette Notification in question there is nothing in it to pin-point the location of the land in dispute with any certainty to the effect whether it fell within the Municipal limits of Kohat City.
4. ' This petition, therefore, fails and is dismissed.