' BASHARAT AHMAD SHAIKH, J.---Raja Muhammad Hanif Khan, an Advocate of this Court, has moved an application under Rule 6 of Order XLVI of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir: Supreme Court Rules wherein he prays. That he may be allowed to draw petition for review of this Court's judgment in Civil Appeal No,161 of 1998, titled Raja Abdul Majid, Section Officer and 24 others v. Syed Abdul Latif Shah and others. The learned counsel was not a counsel in the said case but was engaged by Syed Abdul Latif Shah to draw, file and prosecute the review petition for reversal of the aforementioned judgment of this Court. The learned counsel has simultaneously drafted the review petition and filed it.
2. The aforementioned judgment of this Court was announced on 6th July, 1999 and application under Rule 6 was filed on 5th of August, 1999. The reason on, which the application is based is incorporated in para.2 of the application. However, the learned counsel also filed a review petition drafted by him on the same day. It means that the learned counsel drew the review application without permission of the Court.
3. Rule 6, under which the application has been moved, runs as follows:.
"6. Except with the special leave of the Court, no application shall be drawn by any Advocate other than the Advocate who appeared at the hearing of the case in which the judgment at order, sought to be reviewed, was made. Such Advocate shall, unless his presence has been dispensed with by the Court, be present at the hearing of the application for review."
A bare reading of the provision reproduced above shows that it specifically prohibits an Advocate other than the Advocate who appeared at the hearing of the case of which the judgment or order, sought to be reviewed, was made to draw a review petition unless the Court grants him special leave' to do so. In the present case Raja Muhammad Hanif Khan has already drawn the review petition without provision of the Court and has also filed it in the Court. Therefore, the application moved by the learned counsel does not fall under Rule 6.
4. The application is also misconceived due to another reason. If we ignore the review petition already drawn and filed by the learned counsel and grant permission to draw the review petition, it will be of no use because the period prescribed for filing of review petition expired about two months ago.
5. We may point out that similar applications have been dismissed by this Court at previous occasions also. The Supreme Court of Pakistan also dismissed a similar review petition drawn without permission as "being against the rules" in Barkat All v. The State 1972 SCM R 470.
' The application as well as the review petition are dismissed.