ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

E.A. No.169 of 2018

________________________________________________________

Date Order with signature of Judge

________________________________________________________

1. For orders on office objection a/w reply as at “A”

2. For haring of main case.

26.06.2018

M/s. Sain Dad Rind, Muhammad Yousuf and Amjad Ali Qureshi, advocates for appellant.

Mr. Iqbal Khurram advocate files Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No.2.

Mr. Muhammad Ayub Khattak Law Officer, ECP.

======

Being dissatisfied and aggrieved with the order dated 19.06.2018 passed by the respondent No.1 whereby the nomination form of respondent No.2 were accepted for Minorities Reserved Seat, the appellant has filed instant Appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellant contends that respondent No.2 is a corrupt person and had issued NOC for the sale of amenity property of Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA), which is clear violation of Ordinance No.V of 2002. Copy of Ordinance is available as annexure “A” at page-11 with MoA. Learned counsel for the appellant further contends that respondent No.2 is also involved in numerous cases of corruption, bribe, fraud, dishonesty and taking illegal, unlawful and undue advantages of his power and he has issued so many illegal order and notification against the Christian Community.

Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 contends that the allegations made against the respondent No.2 are baseless and frivolous. He further submits that the nomination papers of respondent No.2 has been accepted after due verification and completion of codal formalities. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 further contends that in respect of property of YMCA a petition bearing No.D-330/2005 is pending in this Court but neither the appellant nor respondent No.2 is party in the said petition therefore, he prayed for dismissal of instant Appeal.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perusal the material available on record carefully and relevant laws.

Main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the respondent No.2 is a corrupt person and he is involved in sale of amenity property of YMCA and in support of his contention he has relied upon Sale Agreement dated 13^th January, 2005. A perusal of said agreement shows that neither the respondent No.2 is party in that agreement nor is a witness and said agreement is executed between YMCA through President Kashif Khalid and Stephen Paul. Learned counsel for the appellant failed to produce any single document in proof of allegations levelled by him against the respondent No.2. It would not be out of place to mention here that alleged sale agreement, referred to above was executed in January, 2005 but till this date appellant or any other person has never made any complaint/case/application against the respondent No.2 for his alleged malafide acts and corruption, therefore, the appellant has failed to prove his case against the respondent No.2 and is not entitled for relief claimed by him through this Appeal.

In view of the above circumstances, I find no reason to interfere in the order impugned through this appeal. Hence, instant Election Appeal is hereby dismissed.

JUDGE