C.P No. D – 3870 of 2015

 

Date

               Order with signature of Judge

 

1.    For Katcha Peshi.

2.    For hearing of C.M.A No. 10798/2015.

 

03-11-2015

Mr. Shabir Ali Bozdar, advocate for the petitioners.

M/s Ghulamullah Memon and Arbab Ali Chandio, advocates for respondent No.5.

Mr. Noor Hassan Malak, learned A.A.G.

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

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

            Through instant petition, the petitioner has impugned the orders  passed by the learned Returning Officer and Appellate Authority in the instant petition, wherein nomination of the petitioners has been rejected on the grounds that the petitioner No.1 is defaulter in payment of SEPCO dues to the tune of Rs.719,814/- and Rs. 794,841/- in respect of two meter connections installed at the premises of the petitioner whereas, petitioner has also not declared the assets.

2.         Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to inadvertence, the assets could not be declared, whereas the petitioner has made part payment of electricity charges of Rs.100,000/- each in respect of aforesaid bills.

3.         The notices were issued, pursuant to which a statement has been filed on behalf of respondent No.5 along with annexures and objections, copy of which has been supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioners.

4.         Learned counsel for the respondent No.5 submits that the petitioner has deliberately concealed the facts and has not declared the assets inspite of an opportunity having been given by the appellate authority, whereas admittedly the petitioner No.1 he has also defaulted in respect of electricity dues of huge amount and has only made part payment. Per learned counsel, the impugned orders do not suffer from any error or irregularity and same do not require any interference by this court and the petitioner No.1 is not entitled to contest election in terms of Sindh Local Councils (Election) Rules, 2015.

5.         Learned A.A.G and learned D.A.G, in view of admitted default in payment of huge amount of SEPCO dues, and also non declaration of assets by the petitioners, supported the impugned order passed by two authorities below and submit that the petition is liable to be dismissed.

6.         We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for parties, perused the record with their assistance.

6.         Admittedly, the petitioner No.1 is defaulter in payment of electricity dues for more than six months and has chosen to make part payment of such amount at his own freewill. Whereas he has also not submitted declaration regarding assets inspite of having been confronted with such default any deficiency, even before this Court.

7.         Accordingly, nomination of the petitioners cannot be considered as complete and true and has been rightly rejected by the authorities below, therefore, the impugned orders do not require any interference.

8.         Instant petition being devoid of any merits is dismissed along with listed application.  

 

                                                                                                  Judge

                                                                      Judge

Abdul Salam/P.A