MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR, J. The instant Review Petition, filed under Section 114 read with Order XLVII, C.P.C., carries the following prayer clause: "It is therefore prayed that keeping in view aforesaid submissions, the application may kindly be allowed and judgment dated: 29-12-2020 be reviewed to the extent of cultivation of wheat, barley and fodder in the interest of justice"
2. The operative part of the impugned order, dated 14.12.2020, passed in Constitutional Petition No. 813 of 2019 read as under: "In such circumstances, we are of the view that it is a fit case in which appropriate directions should be issued for enforcement of fundamental rights of the people of Quetta city to enjoy peaceful and qualitative life. It is, therefore, directed as follows:- 1) That the cultivation of crops with contaminated and arsenic sewage water being extremely dangerous to human health as well animals, is an unlawful business which should be stopped immediately.
2) The so called agreement allegedly executed between the representatives of the parties whereby the farmers were allowed to irrigate their field with wastewater after mixing it with (4 cusec) purified water is hereby declared illegal and void.
3) If anyone insists on cultivating crops with wastewater, the machinery of criminal law can also be made operative. The authorities concerned should always see that law prevails and the citizens are made to obey and to act in accordance with law.
4) The PAF authorities are restrained from leasing out state properties to farmers for the purpose of cultivation crops with waste water.
5) The functionaries of Balochistan Food Authority will keep proper vigilance to ensure that above directions are fully complied with and the Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner and Provincial Police Officer are directed to extend full cooperation to the Director General of Food Authority in the process of implementation of aforesaid directions. Copy of this order be sent to the Office of the Chief Secretary, the Provincial Police Officer, the Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioner and the Director General, Balochistan Food Authority for compliance and further necessary action.
3. Undoubtedly, the Courts are vested the powers to review the orders, judgments, and decrees with certain restrictions, limitations conditions, being provided in Section 114, and Order XLVII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (C.P.C.). The Court while reviewing judgment, order cannot sit as a Court of appeal as the grounds for appeal and review are totally different from each other.
Whenever, there is a clerical, arithmetical, accidental, typographical and a pencil slip mistake which is floating on the surface of record or, which apparently is against the law coverable under Order XLVII, Rule 1, C.P.C., could be reviewed. The provisions of Section 114 and Order XLVII, Rule 1, C.P.C., for convenience are reproduced as under: "S.114. Review. (1) Subject as aforesaid, any person considering himself aggrieved, -
(a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed by this Code but from which no appeal has been preferred; or
(b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed by this Code,- may apply for a review of judgment to the Court which passed the decree or made the order, and the Court may make such order thereon as it thinks fit."
"Order XLVII, Rule 1, C.P.C. Application for review of judgment-(1) Any person considering himself aggrieved--
(a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed, but from which no appeal has been preferred,
(b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed, or
(c) by a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Causes, and who, from the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence, was not within his knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree was passed or order made, or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or for any other sufficient reason, desires to obtain a review of the decree passed or order made against him, may apply for a review of judgment to the Court which passed the decree or made the order."
4. The most important requirement of entertaining a review petition is that the order, review of which is sought, suffers from any error apparent on the face of the order and permitting the order to stand will lead to failure of justice. In review, Court does not sit in appeal over its own order.
Similarly re-hearing of the matter is impermissible in law. Likewise, it constitutes an exception to the general rule that once a judgment is signed or pronounced, it should not be altered. The power of review can be exercised for correction of a mistake and not to substitute a view.
5. At this juncture, a question arises, as to whether the case of applicant fits within the four corners of review jurisdiction of this Court? Learned counsel for the applicant has failed to point any illegality or material irregularity in the impugned order. All the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant has already been duly attended in the impugned order. As far as, the contention of the learned counsel that the respondents did not place on record any kind of laboratory reports in order to show that the crops sown by the applicants are harmful or dangerous either for human being or animals is concerned, the same is also devoid of force for the reasons that a number of studies have been referred in the impugned judgment showing that sewage water is the richest source of micro and macronutrients this aims for the better growth and productivity of plant(vegetables, medicinal plants and higher plants) however, heavy metals contents i.e. Cadmium (Cd), Chromium (Cr), Copper (Cu), Nickel (Ni) and Lead (Pb), in vegetables and even soil become very high which have harmful effects on human and animal health. Besides the different studies, the respondent No. 5, i.e. Director General, Balochistan Food Authority, has also annexed a number of reports, issued by the Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources, Water Research Center, Quetta, whereby samples of sewage water were collected from different points at Quetta and it was reported that ,the parameters of Total Soluble Solids (TSS), Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Chemical Concentration Demand (COD) are at very high ratio, which are not suitable for agriculture purpose and the sewage water also contaminate the surrounding environment.
6. Before parting with the order at hand, it would be pertinent to mention here that we are conscious of the fact that due to scarcity of fresh water, sewage water is the main source of irrigation as we are living under arid to semi-arid conditions and agriculture in Quetta valley without using sewage water is not possible and it estimated that 20% to 26% of the total domestic vegetable production of our country is cultivated with wastewater. The use of sewage water is a way to substitute and divert scarce fresh water resources away from agriculture towards other beneficial uses and can avoid pollution of fresh water bodies that, are used for high value purposes. Such water can only be used after, proper treatment in order to avoid risks to human health. After removal of all harmful pathogens and other pollutants, sewage water can be used for agricultural and even domestic use. The copy of this judgment be sent to Secretary Health Department, Director General Food Authority, Director General, Balochistan Water and Sanitation Authority (BWASA) and Administrator, Metropolitan Corporation, Quetta for taking steps for establishment of water treatment plants in different parts of Quetta.
For the reasons stated above, the applicant has not been able to point any illegality, material irregularity or jurisdictional defect, thus, the application is hereby dismissed being without substance.