IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.

Constt: Petition No.D-        3995   of 2015

DATE                                     ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

 

1-     For KatchaPeshi.

2-     For hearing of CMA.No.12046/2015

 

03rd. November, 2015.

 

                        Mr. GhulamMurtazaKorai, Advocate along with petitioner.

                        Mr. Shabbir Ali Bozdar, Advocate for Respondents No.5 & 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. 130 of 2015 dated 09.10.2015 whereby the nomination paper of respondents No.5 & 6 have been accepted and the objections filed by the petitioner have been rejected.

 

                        Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.6 has not disclosed the assets in his name in the declaration, as according to learned Counsel he is residing in a Pacca house, however, the same has not been declared as his asset.

 

                        Notices were issued, pursuant to which Mr. Shabbir Ali Bozdar, learned Counsel filed Vakalatnama on behalf of Respondents No.5 & 6 alongwith objections, wherein, the allegations as contained in the instant petition have been vehemently denied. It has been stated by the learned Counsel for respondents   No.5 & 6 that they have not mis-declared their assets in the nomination papers as alleged by the petitioner nor the petitioner has provided any document or material which may suggest that respondents have concealed any asset or false declaration has been made by the respondents. Per learned Counsel, the appellate authority has examined the entire facts and the allegations raised by the petitioner, however, in the absence of any material, rejected such allegations. It has been prayed that instant petition is misconceived in facts as well as in law, which may be dismissed.

                        Learned Asstt: A.G as well as D.A.G, after perusal of the record and in absence of any material or document produced by the petitioner, supported the impugned order passed by the appellate authority and submit that the instant petition is liable to be dismissed.

                        Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances and after perusal of the impugned order of the appellate authority, we do not find any error or illegality in the said orders, whereas, the petitioner has not been able to substantiate his allegations. Accordingly, instant petition is devoid of any merits, which is dismissed as such.

JUDGE

JUDGE         

A.R.BROHI