IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.
Constt:
Petition No.D- 3987 of 2015
DATE ORDER WITH
SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE
1-
For KatchaPeshi.
2-
For hearing of CMA.No.12049/2015
03rd.
November, 2015.
Mr.
GhulamShabbirDayo, Advocate for petitioner.
M/s
Muhammad SaleemJessar&
Shabbir
Ali Bozdar, Advocate for Respondents No.6.
Mr. Noor Hassan Malik,
Asstt: A.G.
Mr. MianMumtazRabbani,
D.A.G.
Through
instant petition, the petitioner has impugned the order passed by the Returning Officer as well as
Appellate Authority in Election Appeal No. 60 of 2015 dated 12.10.2015 whereby
the nomination paper of respondent No.6 has been accepted.
Learned
Counsel for the petitioner submits that since respondent No.6 is a defaulter in
respect of SEPCO charges, therefore, he is not eligible to contest elections
and debarred in view of election laws and rules.
Notices
were issued, pursuant to which M/s Muhammad SaleemJessarand Shabbir Ali Bozdar, Advocates filed their
Vakalatnamas on behalf of Respondents No.6 along with objections, wherein, the
allegations as contained in the instant petition have been seriously denied and
it has been stated that the respondent No.6 is not a defaulter in respect of
utility charges, whereas, no dues certificate has already been annexed which is
duly signed by three officers of SEPCO. Learned Counsel further submits that
the allegations besides being false and frivolous, have been leveled to
disentitle the respondent No.6 to contest elections which is his fundamental
right, whereas, the respondent No.6 is
otherwise eligible to contest the elections as per election law and
rules, whereas, the impugned orders passed by the Returning Officer as well as
Appellate Authority do not suffer from any error or illegality.
Learned
Asstt: A.G as well as D.A.G, in view of above facts and circumstances of this
case and in the absence of any material showing any defect or deficiency in the
nomination form of respondent No.6, have supported the contention of learned
Counsel for respondent No.6 and have supported the impugned orders passed by
the authorities below, and submit that instant petition is misconceived, which
may be dismissed accordingly.
Keeping
in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances and after perusal of the impugned
order of the appellate authority, we do not find any substance in the instant
petition, which is based on frivolous allegations which are not supported by
any material. Accordingly, instant petition is dismissed along with listed application.
JUDGE
JUDGE
A.R.BROHI