ABDUL RASHID vs Mst. ANWAR BIBI and others
This matter arises from a petition seeking review of a judgment passed by the High Court dated 31-5-2001, which adjudicated issues concerning a preferential right of pre-emption based on contiguous property and local customs. The core legal question involves determining whether grounds exist for exercising review jurisdiction under the Constitution. The Supreme Court held that the scope of review is very limited and that no case was made out for interference or the exercise of jurisdiction, thereby dismissing the petition. The key principle laid down is that review jurisdiction cannot be invoked by merely repeating arguments previously considered and rejected when no valid ground for interference is established.
- What is the scope of review jurisdiction under Article 188 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan?
- Can a review petition be entertained when the arguments raised are merely a repetition of those addressed during the leave to appeal stage?
- Article 185(3), Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Article 188, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
1. ' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---We have heard the learned counsel and have also perused the judgment passed by learned High Court, dated 31-5-2001 particularly with reference to decision on Issues Nos.1 and 2 pertaining to the fact "as to whether the respondent/plaintiff has a preferential right of pre-emption having contiguous property with the property of petitioner/defendant as well as with regard to the customs of pre-emption in the locality in which the property is situated. It may be noted that even at the time of disposal of petition for leave to appeal all the arguments were heard and it was concluded that no case is made out for interference by this Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
2. ' Today again the position is the same and same arguments have been repeated by the learned counsel, therefore, we are of the opinion that the scope of review is very limited, as such, no case is made out for exercise of jurisdiction under Article 188 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Thus we see no force in the petition, which is hereby dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- Chaudhary MUHAMMAD UMAR Versus SEEMA BEGUM 2026 CLC 407