ORDER
SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
C.P
No. D- 347 of 2016
_________________________________________________________________ DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE
OF JUDGE ______________________________________________________________________
For katcha
Peshi.
04-02-2016.
Mr. Mashooq Ali Shaikh
Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. Noor Hassan
Malik Asst: A.G
a/w Shahnawaz Solangi
Election Officer Ghotki.
-------------
Through instant petition, petitioner
has impugned order dated.23.01.2016 whereby nomination paper of the petitioner
for special seat reserved for ‘Youth’ from Ward No.4 Union Council Sui Shareef district Ghotki was
rejected by Returning Officer on account of petitioner being over age. Learned counsel for
the petitioner was directed to satisfy the Court as to maintainability of
instant petition which has been filed against
the impugned order passed by Returning Officer instead of filing an appeal
before the appellant tribunal in accordance with law/rules, in response to
which it has been stated that the petitioner was not informed about rejection
of his nomination form by the Returning Officer, therefore instant petition has
been filed as time for filing appeal has already lapsed. Learned counsel for
petitioner was also confronted to
satisfy this Court regarding the criteria of required age limit for the
aforesaid seat which has been prescribed as between 21 to 25 years, whereas as
per CNIC of the petitioner, his date of birth is shown as 1988, in response to
which, learned counsel for petitioner has stated that it was wrongly mentioned in
the CNIC of petitioner, whereas different date of birth of petitioner has been entered
in the School Leaving Certificate of Class 5th, issued by Govt.(Boys) S.S High School Daharki district Ghotki.
Such
disputed fact regarding age can not be examined in
the instant petition which involves disputed facts, whereas no reasonable
explanation has been given to by pass the forum and
the remedy provided under Election Laws. In view of facts and circumstances of
the case, we are of the opinion that the instant petition is misconceived and
not maintainable, which is accordingly dismissed in limine.
J U D G E
`
J
U D G E
Irfan/PA