ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.

 

Constt: Petition No.D-   3616  of 2015

 

DATE                         ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

 

FOR KATCHA PESHI.

 

08th. October, 2015.

 

 

                        Mr. Zafar Ali Eidan Mangi, Advocate for Petitioner.

 

                        Mr. Mian Mumtaz Rabbani, D.A.G.

 

                        Mr. Noor Hassan Malik, Asstt: A.G.

 

 

 

                        Through instant petition, petitioner has impugned the order dated 30.9.2015 passed by District & Sessions Judge/Appellate Authority, Sukkur in Election Appeal No.100/2015, whereby the appeal filed by petitioner against the order dated 17.9.2015 passed by Returning Officer UC-01 to 05 Sukkur, has been dismissed.

 

                        Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that the Proposer and Candidate reside in the same house, however, on account of some confusion petitioner’s vote is registered in Union Committee-6 Shaikh Sheen, Sukkur. Per learned Counsel, nomination form has been rejected on political grounds, hence requests that the impugned orders may be set-aside and the Nomination Paper of the petitioner may be accepted.

 

                        Conversely, learned D.A.G as well as Asstt: A.G representing the respondents opposed the maintainability of instant petition on the ground that the impugned order passed by District & Sessions Judge/ Appellate Authority, Sukkur does not suffer from any factual or legal error, whereas,   in terms of Rule 18(5) of Sindh Local Council (Election) Rules, 2015 said is final order in all respects and cannot be assailed before any forum. It has been further contended that even otherwise, admittedly, the petitioner did not belong to the same Ward No.4, and as per certificate submitted by the petitioner himself his vote is enlisted in Union Council-6, therefore, as per Sindh Local Council (Elections) Rules, 2015, petitioner is not eligible to contest election from Ward-4.

 

                        While confronted with such factual position, learned Counsel for petitioner could not deny the same. Accordingly, we do not see any error or illegality in the impugned order dated 30.9.2015 passed by learned District & Sessions Judge/Appellate Authority, Sukkur., which otherwise depicts correct, factual and legal position, whereas, learned Counsel for petitioner could not produce any material which could establish the eligibility of the petitioner to contest election from UC-4, Sukkur.

 

                        Petition being misconceived in facts and law is hereby dismissed in limine.

 

JUDGE

JUDGE                     

 

A.R.BROHI