1990 PLP 749 (CLC)
AMIR NAWAB‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ELECTION COMMISSIONER and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 749 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian, C.J. and Abdul Raldnr Kazi, J |
| Parties | AMIR NAWAB‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ELECTION COMMISSIONER and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Delimitation of Constituencies Act (XXXIV of 1984)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 749 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Delimitation of Constituencies Act (XXXIV of 1984)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 749 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ajmal Mian, C.J. and Abdul Raldnr Kazi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 749 (CLC) (AMIR NAWAB‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ELECTION COMMISSIONER and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Sharif Khattak for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 9‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑‑Delimitation of constituencies‑‑‑Alteration‑‑‑Petitioner challenging delimitation of constituencies on the ground that provisions of S. 9 of Act had been violated‑‑‑Sketch of constituencies produced by petitioner alongwith memo. of petition showing that changes brought about by Authorities did not in any manner contravene or violate provisions of law laid down in S. 9 of Act‑‑‑Changes, inclusion and exclusion pertained to area contiguous to very constituencies to which they were added‑‑‑Delimitation of constituencies was based on not only geographical situation but also on basis of population and it was function of Authorities to determine same‑‑‑High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction would not embark upon an enquiry of fact pertaining to such factors‑‑‑Interference therefore was declined in Constitutional jurisdiction.
Judgment & Decree
(1) To restore the delimitation of the constituencies gazetted vide No.F.5(30)/88 Cord. dated 16‑8‑1988, as reported August, 19th & 20th, 88 of daily Jang, Karachi. (2) To quash/declare null and void the impugned notification No.F.5(119)/88 Cord. dated 1‑10‑1988 in respect of constituencies Nos PS‑73 74 & 77. (3) Direct the respondents Nos.3 to 5 not to hold the election of the said Constituencies till the final disposal of this petition. (4) Any other relief/reliefs as deemed fit and suitable. in the circumstances of the case." We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. He has mainly urged that the principles laid down for delimitation of constituencies as provided in Delimitation of Constituencies Act, 1974, have been violated. He has urged that the constituencies are to be delimited in view of the principles of geographical compaction and the convenience of the voters as well as to ensure homogeneity. He has also drawn our attention to section 9 of the Delimitation of Constituencies Act, 1974, which lays down the principles of delimitation. It will be advantageous to reproduce the same as under:‑ "
9. Princinles of Delimitation.‑‑(1) All constituencies shall, as far as practicable, be delimited having regard to the distribution of population in georaphically compact areas, existing boundaries of administrative units, facilities of communication and public convenience and other cognate factors to ensure homogeneity in the creation of constituencies: Provided that for the purpose of delimiting the constituencies for the general seats for the Federally Administered Tribal Area two or more separated areas may be grouped into one constituency. (2) As far as may be the constituencies for election to the same Assembly shall be equal among themselves in population." We have also perused the sketch of three constituencies, produced by the petitioner alongwith the memo of petition, as annexure `C' at page 25 of the record. It is quite apparent from this sketch that the said changes do not in any manner contravened or violated the provisions as laid down in the section 9 of the above Act. The said changes and inclusion and exclusion pertained to the areas contagious to the very constituencies to which they are added. We, therefore do not find any violation of the above said legal provision. 1t may be pointed out that the delimitation of the constituencies is based on not only the geographical situation but also on the basis of the population and it is the function of the Election Authorities to determine the same. We in exercise of writ jurisdiction shall not embark upon an enquiry of fact pertaining to the above factors. For these reasons we find no substance in the present petition which is dismissed in limine. These are the reasons for the short order passed today dismissing the petition in limine. M.Y.H./A‑653/K Petition dismissed.