ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.

Constt: Petition No.D-   4039  of 2015

DATE                                     ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

 

FOR KATCHA PESHI.

11th. November, 2015.

 

                        Mr. Najeebullah Jalbani, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Shabbir Ali Bozdar, Advocate for Respondents No.5 & 6.

Mr. Liaquat Ali Shar, Addl: A.G.

Mr. Mian Mumtaz Rabbani, D.A.G.

 

                        Through instant petition, the petitioner has impugned the orders passed by the Retuning Officer as well as Appellate Authority, whereby the objections filed by the petitioner on the nomination form of the respondents No.5 & 6 have been dismissed.

                        Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that the respondent No.5 & 6 are defaulter in respect of SEPCO dues amounting to Rs.4136/- and bank loan of Z.T.B.L which was obtained in the name of father of respondent No.6 amounting to Rs.2,95,276/-, whereas, according to learned Counsel the respondent No.6 also did not disclose his true assets i.e the share in ancestral agricultural lands.

                        Notices were issued, pursuant to which respondents No.5 & 6 shown their appearance, whereas, Mr. Shabbir Ali Bozdar, advocate filed statement along with annexures on behalf of respondent No.5 & 6 and submits that the respondents are not defaulters in terms of definition provided under election laws, however, submits that an amount of Rs.4136/- in respect of SEPCO dues for the month of September, 2015 has already been paid, similarly an amount outstanding against late father of respondent No.6 i.e Rs.2,95,276/- bank loan of Z.T.B.L, out of which an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-  has been paid by respondent No.6 and copy of such paid bill and acknowledgment in respect of Rs.100,000/- by the Z.T.B.L has been annexed along with statement, as regards the allegation of concealment of assets i.e the share in ancestral agricultural land of respondent No.6, learned Counsel submits that there is no such concealment of declaration of assets in the nomination paper by respondent No.6 as he has already sold out his share in the ancestral agricultural land to his brother and has also annexed a copy of an agreement, which is available on record. It has been prayed that there is no default on the part of respondents No.5 & 6, therefore, the impugned orders do not suffer from any error or illegality hence the instant petition may be dismissed.

                        Learned Addl: A.G as well as Asstt: A.G in view of above stated facts do not controvert such position and submit that instant petition is misconceived and may be dismissed.

                        We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties, perused the record, which reflects that there is no outstanding amount against the respondents No.5 & 6 in respect of utility bills, whereas, out of loan obtained by late father of respondent No.6 an amount of Rs.100,000/- has been voluntarily paid by respondent and the amount of remaining loan outstanding against late father of respondent No.6 is below the prescribed limit of two Millions, hence the respondents cannot be considered as defaulters in this account. Accordingly, we do not find any substance in the instant petition, which is hereby dismissed.

JUDGE

JUDGE

A.R.BROHI