Through this writ petition petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 05.07.201 9 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Kamalia whereby revision petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the order of learned trial court dated 14.11.2018 whereby an application moved by the petitioner for appointment of Local Commission in a suit filed by the petitioner for permanent injunction was dismissed.
2. At the very outset learned counsel for the petitioner was confronted with the position that how the orders passed by both the learned courts below are without jurisdiction as through this writ petition the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction vested in this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Learned counsel though argued the matter but was unable to respond the query of this Court. Learned counsel has relied upon "Muhammad Yousaf alias Bala versus Khuda Dad and 11 others " (2004 MLD 1107), "Muhammad Aslam versus Baldia Noor Pur Thal through Administrator and another " (2004 YLR 803) and "Syed Abu-ul-Fazal versus Mehmood and another " (1989 CLC 2357 ).
3. I have gone through the case law cited by learned counsel and consulted the record appended with this writ petition.
4. The basic question is that this Court can exercise the jurisdiction vested in it under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 in some appropriate and exceptional circumstances when a case is made out that the forums/courts below have exerc ised the jurisdiction not vested in them by law or failed to exercise the jurisdiction. Case of such nature has not been made out.
5. When maintainability of Writ Petition is questioned, it is often heard in response from the learned counsel that Sir, when no other remedy is available, therefore, petitioner has no option except to file writ petition. I am afraid it is not the proper response. I am clear in my mind that when legislature has not given right of appeal or revision against the orders impugned through the writ petition, exercise of jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakist an, 1973 as an appellate jurisdiction will be to circumvent the intention of the legislature. When against an order where application for appointment of Local Commission is decided, no appeal is provided and revisional jurisdiction has already been exercised, no other remedy under the law is available and the thought that remedy of constitutional jurisdiction is synonymous to appeal, review or revisional jurisdiction is a misconception.
6. For invoking constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner was bound to show some jurisdictional defect committed by the Courts below while deciding the matter in issue through the impugned orders but the learned counsel could not point out either any jurisdictional defect, perversity in the orders passed by the courts below or establish any exceptional circumstances for exercising constitutional jurisdiction.
The case law referred to by learned coun sel for the petitioner is not applicable to the facts of this case. I have no reason to disagree with the learned two courts below . Resultantly this writ petition having no force stands dismissed in limine .