Find a Lawyer

Civil Review Petition No. 3‑R of 1979 in Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1.978, decided on 19th June, 1978.

(On review from the judgment of this Court dated 18th September 1978 in Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1978).

---O. XXVI‑Review‑Not permissible in review proceedings to embark upon reiteration of same contentions as advanced at time of hearing of appeal and considered and repelled in judgment under review in an effort to discover errors said to be apparent on face of record‑Petitioner's counsel trying to re‑open and argue whole case again on merits and interpretation placed by Court on relevant provisions of College prospectus‑Petitioner, held, cannot be per mitted to‑adopt such course under rules of Court.

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto v. The State P L D 1979 S C 741 ref.

---O. XXVI‑Review proceedings‑Petitioner's counsel contending that at any rate, in alternative, petitioner (Principal of Medical Col lege) may be allowed to transfer respondent No. 1 (student rusti cated for one year) from his College to another College in Punjab‑Courts, held, had no say in matter and open to petitioner to proceed in accordance with law in case of his being empowered to do so‑Petition also being barred by 81 days liable to be dismissed on such short ground alone‑Case, held, not fit for review-

Sh. Riaz Ahmad, Assistant Advocate‑General (Punjab) instructed by Sh. Ijaz Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record‑ for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 19th June 1979.

.‑This is a review petition against the judgment dated 18th of September 1978, whereby this Court partly accepted the Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1978, by special leave filed by respondent No. 1 herein against the present petitioner and some others

Briefly stated the relevant facts necessary for the disposal of this petition are these. The respondent was a final year student in the Nishtar Medical College, Multan. On the 27th of April 1977, he alongwith another student, attacked and beat up a professor of the College in the College premises. In due course, the Disciplinary Committee submitted its report to the Principal and the respondent was expelled from the College for a period of three years in accordance with the order passed by him on the 28th of August 1977. The respondent questioned the validity of this order through a writ petition filed in the Lahore High Court at Lahore. But a learned Judge of the Lahore High Court on the 28th of October, 1977, dismissed his writ petition. He also failed on an Inter Court appeal which was rejected by a Division Bench of the Court on the 19th of November, 1977.

This Court however, partly accepted his appeal by special leave from the judgment of the High Court on the 18th of September, 1978. In the opinion of this Court under rule H of the General Disciplinary Rules, cont ained in the prospectus of the Government Medical Colleges of the Punjab for the year 1975‑76, the Principal of the College bad no lawful authority to rusticate a student for more than one year. This Court therefore, allowed the writ of the respondent to the extent that his rustication shall be valid for one year only. In these circumstances the petitioner has filed this petition for review of the order made by this Court.

In this petition the petitioner has prayed for the following two reliefs that :‑

(a) The judgment dated 18th of September 1978 in Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1978, may be reviewed and the judgment of the Lahore High Court be restored ; or

(b) In the alternative the petitioner may be allowed to transfer the respondent No. 1 from Nishtar Medical College to another College in the Punjab.

In this connection we have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. At the outset we deem it necessary to observe that this Court in accepting the appeal of respondent No. 1 by its judgment dated 18th of Septe mber 1978, under review, did not even remotely approve of his conduct. Indeed, it was a most shocking and reprehensible conduct on his part to nave joined with another student and attacked and beat up a professor in the College premises. This Court however, is duty bound to interpret and apply the law according to its own understanding even to the worst of the criminal brought before it. Accordingly, in accepting the appeal of respondent No. 1, this Court had no other option but to apply the law as interpreted by it to the facts of this case brought before it.

In this review petition the learned counsel for the petitioner had tried to reopen and argue the whole case once again before us on the merits and the interpretation placed by this Court on the relevant provisions in the prospectus of the College. This he is not, of course, permitted to d in these proceedings for review under the rules of this Court. In thi connection it has been recently authoritatively laid down in the reported case of Zulftkar All Bhutto v. The State (PLD1979SC741 ) that as finality attaches to the judgments delivered by this Court, which stands at the apex of the judicial hierarchy, a review proceeding is neither in the nature of a re‑hearing of the whole case, nor is it an appeal against the judgment under review. It is accordingly not permissible to embark upon a reiteration of the same contentions as were advanced at the time of the hearing of the appeal, but were considered and repelled in the judgment under review, in an effort to discover errors said to be apparent on the face of the record. We are therefore, constrained to hold that this review petition before us is not competent.

The learned counsel for the petitioner next laid stress to contend that at any rate in the alternative, the petitioner may be allowed to transfer respondent No. 1 from Nishtar Medical College to another College in the Punjab. In this connection however, we find that this Court had no say in the matter and it is open to the petitioner to proceed in accordance with law in case he has any power in the matter. Even otherwise, the petition is barred by 81 days and is liable to be dismissed on this show ground alone. We therefore find that this is not a fit case for review o the judgment dated 18th of September 1978, delivered by this Court. This petition has no force and is dismissed.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.