MUHAMMAD NASIR MAHFOOZ, (J):-Through this review petition the petitione rs have sought indulgence of this court in an order passed on 22.04.2013, in RFA No. 29/2013, vide which the same was dismissed in limine holding the same as revision petition and barred by time.
1. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
2. Perusal of record reveals that instant review petition has been filed on 14.11.2016, by respondents. Since the order impugned has been passed on 22.04.2013 and the instant review petition is filed after period of about 03 years and 07 months whereas the limitation for filing of review petition as provided by Article 162 of Limitation Act, is 20 days. Furthermore, the application for condonation of delay filed by the petitioners does not explain the fact as to why delay occurred in filing of this petition.
4. Besides above legal aspects of the case, the petitioners in this review petition wanted to re open the case which had already been decided. This court otherwise could not hear the matter as appellate court of its own judgment even if the same is erroneous as per version of learned counsel, as the exercise of review jurisdiction is limited in scope, it does not give powers of rehearing of a matter already remained subjudice and decided. Furthermore, the learned counsel for the petitioners failed to point out any floating error worth consideration for review and the instant petition is also barred by time. This court in C.R No. 389 of 2011 held that, "So, in the circumstances, this court instead of giving any further detailed judgment or dilating upon the legal provisions, once again as has already been discussed in the judgment of above said writ petitions, allow all the revisions petitions by setting aside the orders, judgments and decrees rendered by the concerned appellate/revisional courts on the strength of judgment of this court in RFA No. 02 of year 2010, with the title of "Shamsher Ali khan and another Vs. DGMM, Sammi Daewoo Express Bus Service and two others", and send back all the cases to the concerned appellate/revisional courts with the directions to consider each and every case on its own merits and available record and see as to whether the appeal/revision filed by the appellant/petitioner after exclusion of time requisite under section 12(2) of the Limitation Act of 1908 for obtaining certified copies, is within thirty days as provided in sub Para (8) of Para 10 of Shariah Nizam-e- Adl Regulation, 2009 and if after such exclusion, the appeal/revision is within prescribed time, then that appeal/revision by considering it to be within the time under the regulation, ibid, and decide the same on the basis of its available record and the law. No order as to costs.
5. Since connected RFA No. 90-M/2012 filed by the Government is pending in this court and rights of those persons who had not filed any objection petition and were not party to the appeal challenged in Review petition No. 01-C/2016 can be considered in the light of case titled, "Sadaqat Ali Khan through LRs and others vs Collector Land Acquisition and others " reported as PLD 2010 Supreme Court 878.
In view of above as no case is made out, hence the instant review petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.