ORDER
SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.
Constt: Petition No.D- 3916 of 2015
DATE ORDER WITH
SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE
1-
For KatchaPeshi.
2-
For hearing of CMA.No.10924/2015
03rd.
November, 2015.
Mr. GhulamShabbirDayo,
Advocate along with petitioner.
Mr. Noor Hassan Malik, Asstt: A.G
Mr. MianMumtazRabbani,
D.A.G.
Mr. Shabbir Ali Bozdar, Advocate for Respondent No.6.
Through
instant petition, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 12.10.2015,
passed by the Appellate Authority/ District & Sessions Judge, NaushahroFeroze in
Election Appeal No.174 of 2015, whereby the appeal filed by the respondent No.6
has been allowed and the nomination paper of the petitioner has been rejected,
on the ground of default in payment of PTCL charges.
Learned
Counsel for petitioner submits that no objection whatsoever was raised by
respondent No.6 or any other authority before the Returning Officer with regard
to alleged outstanding PTCL charges who accepted the nomination papers,
whereas, such objection was raised before the appellate authority, who did not
provide any opportunity to the petitioner to pay such bills and the impugned
order has been passed whereby the nomination paper of the petitioner has been
rejected. It has been contended by learned Counsel that the petitioner has paid
the defaulted amount of PTCL charges
Rs.10,010/- and also Rs.20950/-, Rs.2170/-, and Rs.5830/- which have
been issued by the PTCL department subsequently, when the petitioner approached
them, as the same were allegedly outstanding in respect of some
previous telephone connections, however, the petitioner has paid all the PTCL charges,
so that he may not be treated as defaulter and may be allowed to contest the
forthcoming elections, whereas, the petitioner otherwise is qualified to
contest the elections, hence prays that the impugned order may be set-aside and
the nomination form of the petitioner may be accepted and he may be allowed to
contest the forthcoming elections.
Notices
were issued, pursuant to which Mr. Muhammad SaleemJessar,
Advocate filed Vakalatnama as well as
objections on behalf of respondent No.6 and submits that since the petitioner
was defaulter of PTCL charges, therefore, he was not entitled to contest the
elections. It has been further stated that petitioner is also defaulter in
respect of SEPCO charges as he is running his business along with his father in
the name of New Chakwal,
Goods Transport Company, such contention of learned Counsel for respondent
No.6 has been vehemently opposed by the learned Counsel for petitioner who
submits that petitioner is an independent person, whereas such objection has
been raised for the first time before this Court just to deprive the petitioner
from contesting elections.
Learned
Asstt: A.G as well as D.A.G, in view of the deposit
of PTCL charges voluntarily by the petitioner, support the contention of
learned Counsel for the petitioner and further submit that similar petitions
have already been allowed by this bench as well as by various benches of this
Court and Principal
Seat, whereby, after payment of utility charges the candidates have been
allowed to participate in the elections.
We
have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record and
impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority passed in the instant case who rejected the nomination paper of the petitioner in view
of the default in payment of PTCL charges. Admittedly, the petitioner has paid
all the charges voluntarily and prima-facie there is no other defect or
deficiency in the nomination paper filed by the petitioner. Accordingly instant
petition along with listed application stands allowed and the impugned order
passed by the Appellate Authority is hereby set-aside and the nomination paper
of the petitioner stands accepted. However the respondents are at liberty to
raise such objection in respect of eligibility of petitioner before the proper
forum by filing appropriate proceedings, in accordance with law.
JUDGE
JUDGE
A.R.BROHI