Raja Saeed Akram Khan, C.J. All the titled petitions have been filed for review of judgment of this Court dated 21.12.2021, whereby , Civil Appeals No.94, 95 and 96 of 2021 were disposed of in the following manner:- "In the light of issuance of the notification dated 20.12.2021 and statements made by the Assistant Advocate General as well as the Secretary Local Government, we are intended to dispose of these appeals in the following terms:-
(i) As the amended Notification dated 20.12.2021 has been issued, hence, the Chief Election Commissioner is directed to start the process of delimitation and complete the same within a period of 45 days from today in the light of amended Notification and submit a compliance report before this Court through Registrar .
(ii) In the light of statement made by the Assistant Advocate General and the Secretary Local Government, the Government is directed to make arrangem ents for holding free, fair and transparent elections within a period of six months from the completion of process of delimitation, not beyond August, 2022. It is further observed that the elections shall be conducted in the light of census conducted in the year 2017.
(iii) So far as the impugned judgments passed by the High Court are concerned, in order to discourage any further litigation, we would like to clarify that the amended notification dated 20.12.2021 has been issued on the direction of this Court and same is well-reasoned, hence, stands protected. In this state of affairs, the judgments of the High Court will not be a hurdle in the process of delimitation."
2. Some of the petitioners are renowned politicians, whereas, others are members of the District Bar Association, Bagh. For review of the impugned judgment, the learned counsel for the petitioners raised the following grounds:-
(i) That in the judgment under review a direction has been issued that the elections shall be conducted in the light of Census, 2017, whereas, no such census has been notified.
(ii) That in the judgment under review the notification dated 20.12.2021 has been protected which has created an anomalous situation by conveying an impression that the doors of Courts have been closed for the litigants to challenge the disputes relating to the illegalities committed during the process of delimitation.
Additionally , Sardar Muhammad Suleman Khan and Sardar Iftikhar Ahmed, Advocates, submitted that an important legal aspect of the matter has not been looked into by this Court that the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Local Government Election Rules, 1983 are not in consonance with the parent Act, hence, the same are liable to be declared ultra vires. Raja Ayaz Ahmed, Advocate, stated on behalf of the petitioner (Raja Farooq Haider Khan) that the Government as well as the opposition wants holding of elections well in time, however , according to him the elections should be held on the basis of delimitation already conducted in the year 1991.
3. Kh. Muhammad Maqbool War, Advoc ate General accompanied by Mr. Tahir Aziz Khan, Advocate, placed on record the copy of the notification according to which the Census, 2017 was notified and submitted that the argument relating to non-publication of census in the official gazette is misconceived. They further added that in the impugned judgment the word 'protection' only refers to the criterion/formula laid down in the notification dated 20.12.2021, which was issued as per direction of this Court. Even otherwise, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners in this context is against the ground realities as the Delimitation Authority established under the relevant law is fully working and hearing the petitions. So far as the argument relating to the declaration of the AJ&K Local Government Election Rules, 1983 as ultra vires the parent Act is concerned, this point is beyond the scope of the review jurisdiction.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The burning argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners in this petition is that this Court has directed the concerned to hold elections in the light of Census, 2017 which, in fact, has not been notified. This argument has strongly been objected to by the learned Advocate General by producing a copy of the notification according to which the Census, 2017 has been notified. However , during the course of arguments a suggestion was put to the learned Advocates that if the general elections can be held on the basis of electoral rolls, for removal of ambig uities why the elections of local bodies cannot be conducted in the like manner; they unanimously agreed that if this clarification is made they would be satisfied.
6. It has been forcefully argued at bar that this Court in paragraph 2(iii) of the judgment under review has protected the notification dated 20.12.2021, due to which the Courts below are not treating the disputes arising out of the process of delimitation. We are afraid, this argument is not only misconceived but also against the ground realities.
The notification dated 20.12.2021 was issued under the guidelines of this Court whereby a criterion/formula has been fixed for the purpose of delimitation. Through the judgment under review only the formula laid down in the notification has been protected and no clog has been put on the remedy against the illegalities if committed during the process of delimitation. Even otherwise, the Election Commission has appointed the Delimitation Authorities under section 125-E of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Elections Act, 2020 for deciding the objections against the delimitation carried out by the Delimitation Committee. The said Authorities are working at full swing. Almost 900 petitions have been filed before the Delimitation Authorities and a number of those have already been decided. It has also been brought into the notice of the Court that some of the petitioners have also approached the concerned Authorities, hence, in our opinion the argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is devoid of any force.
7. So far as the argument raised by Sardar Muhammad Suleman Khan and Sardar Iftikhar Ahmed, Advocate, that the AJ&K Local Government Election Rules, 1983 are ultra vires the parent Act, is concerned, such an argument cannot be considered in this review petition as the same was not the dispute before us at the time of hearing the appeals. It has been held in a number of cases that the scope of review petition is very limited and confined only to the extent of an error or mistake apparent on the face of record, whereas, no such eventuality exists in this case.
8. So far as the request advanced by Raja Ayaz Ahmed Khan, Advocate, on behalf of the petitioner (Raja Farooq Haider Khan) regarding holding the elections on the basis of delimitation conducte d in the year 1991 is concerned, we have made a query to the Secretary Election Commission in this regard who brought into the notice of the Court that in the year 1991 no delimitation process was conducted rather the elections were held on the basis of delimitation conducted in the year 1987 which was also subsequently cancelled. In this scenario, the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted.
9. For the above stated reasons, we dispose of this review petition with the following clarifications.
(i) That the elections shall be conducted on the basis of electoral rolls prepared, updated and maintained as per the spirit of section 125-B of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Elections Act, 2020; and
(ii) That this Court has only protected the notification dated 20.12.2021 to the extent of formula laid down therein and no clog has been put for availing the remedy before the Delimitation Authorities established by the Election Commission.