ORDERSHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR____.
Const.Petition
No.D- 1319 of 2018
_________________________________________________________________
DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE
OF JUDGE ________________________________________________________________
For hearing of
case.
Mr.Nisar Ahmed Bhanbhro Advocate
for petitioner.
Mr.
Muhammad Ali Nappar Advocate for respondent No.1.
Mr. Muhammad Aslam Jatoi,
Assistant Attorney General.
Mr. Khuda Dino Sangi, Legal Advisor
Election Commission of Pakistan, Sukkur Division a/w……,.
-.-.-.-.-.-
Through the instant constitution petition
petitioner Shahbaz Ahmed Khan Lund has called in question order dated
26.06.2018 passed by learned Election Tribunal in Election Appeal No. S-120 of 2018
whereby appeal filed against acceptance of nomination paper of respondent No.1 was
dismissed.
2. Brief
facts leading to the filing of the petition are that respondent No.1 filed
nomination form before respondent No.2 / Returning Officer to contest elections
at NA-204 Ghotki-I. It appears that Returning officer accepted the nomination
paper mainly for the following reasons:
“ Carefully perused
the nomination paper particularly form B, Affidavit on Oath as well as
documents annexed in presence of his proposer and seconder. Candidature of the
candidate was published on Notice Board, but no objection received from any
quarter. Scrutiny Cell Islamabad sent reports which do not show that candidate
is disqualified for any reason.
Nomination form is accepted.”
3. Thereafter,
petitioner filed appeal before Election Tribunal at Sukkur. After hearing
learned counsel for the parties, appeal was dismissed by the learned Tribunal
vide order dated 26.06.2018 while observing as under:
“
As per Section 63 Sub-section (i) of Election Act,
2017, the objections before the Returning Officer can be filed by any voter of
the constituency if a candidate is voter he may file objection before the
Returning Officer. If a candidate is not a voter of that constituency, he
cannot file objection before the Returning Officer. However, in my humble view
under Section 63(i) of Election Act, 2017, venue has been provided who is
effected from the order of learned Returning officer. In any way no person who
has not filed an objection or who is not an aggrieved candidate can file the
appeal before the Election Tribunal. As far as the objections regarding
concealment of fact are concerned, I am agreed that the learned counsel for the
respondent No.1 that Clauses-k and m are two categories of different income,
and the same have been dealt with in accordance with law. With these
observations, instant appeal is dismissed.”
4. Learned
counsel for respondent No.1, learned D.A.G and advocate appearing on behalf of
Election Commission of Pakistan argued that the petitioner neither filed
objections before the Returning Officer nor he was competent to file appeal
before Election Tribunal, thus prayed for dismissal of petition.
5. We have carefully heard
learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant record.
6. It
is a matter of record that at the time of acceptance of nomination paper no one
had filed objections to the nomination paper of the respondent No.1. Rightly,
it is argued by learned counsel for respondent No.1 that objections were not
filed by the petitioner before Returning Officer. As regards to the assets and
liabilities, counsel for respondent No.1 has satisfied the Court that all the assets
and liabilities were disclosed by respondent No.1 in nomination paper and in
affidavit. We have found no infirmity in the order of learned Election
Tribunal. Thus, no interference is required by this Court. Moreover, counsel
appearing for Election Commission of Pakistan has pointed out that General
Elections 2018 are schedule to be held on 25.07.2018 and interference of this
Court at this stage is not warranted. Reliance is placed upon the case of Ghulam Mustafa
Jatoi vs. Additional Sessions Judge / Returning Officer NA-158 Naushehro Feroze
and others, 1994 SCMR 1299 and 2003 M L
D 607 Haji Khuda Bakhsh Nizamani vs. Election Tribunal and others.
7. In
view of the above, instant const. petition is without merit and the same is
dismissed.
JUDGE
JUDGE
Irfan/PA.