ORDER
SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
C.P
No.D-383 of 2016
______________________________________________________________________ DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE
OF JUDGE ______________________________________________________________________
For katcha Peshi.
16-02-2016.
Mr. Ali Raza
Balouch for petitioners.
Mr. Sikandar Ali Junejo Advocate for respondent No.8.
Mr. Liaquat Ali Shar Additional A.G
a/w Muhammad Imran Election
Officer Sukkur.
-------------
Pursuant to Court notice, Mr. Sikandar Ali Junejo Advocate for
respondent No.8 has shown appearance and submits that the instant petition is
misconceived and
not maintainable as the disputed facts have been agitated through instant
petition. It has been further submitted that the impugned order passed by
District & Sessions Judge /Election Appellate Authority Sukkur
in Election Appeal No.01/2016 does not suffer from any error or illegality,
hence does not require any interference by this Court under constitutional
jurisdiction.
The representative of Election
Commission Sukkur has also shown his appearance and
submits that the nomination papers of the petitioners as well as respondent
No.8 have been duly accepted pursuant to order passed by the Appellate
authority and now the election is scheduled to be held on 20th
February,2016.
We have heard the learned Counsel
for the parties and perused the record. It will be advantageous to reproduce
the relevant finding of the appellate tribunal which reads as follows:
“ The
proposer is present in the Court. He admits his signatures, also identified and
proposed the appellant.
The nomination form of the appellant was simply rejected on the ground of
denial by the proposer at the time of scrutiny.
Sub-Rule-3(a) (ii) of Rule 18
provides that Returning Officer shall not reject a nomination paper on the
ground of any defect which is not of a substantial nature and may allow such
defect to be remedied forthwith.”
In view of hereinabove
facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the
impugned order when the election is scheduled to be held on 20.02.2016 and both
the petitioner and respondent are allowed to contest election. Moreover,
disputed facts agitated before this Court have already
been resolved by the appellate authority whereas, no error could be pointed out
in the impugned order which may require any correction.
Accordingly, instant
petition is devoid of any merits is hereby dismissed in limine.
J U D G E
`
Irfan/PA J U D G E