CLC 2002

2002 PLP 271 (CLC)

GHULAM ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Makhdoom RAFIQUE‑UZ‑ZAMAN and 5 others‑‑‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Civil Petition No. 537 of 2001, decided on 1st July, 2001
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Roshan Essani and Muhammad Ashraf Leghari, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2002 PLP 271 (CLC)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Muhammad Roshan Essani and Muhammad Ashraf Leghari, JJ
Parties GHULAM ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Makhdoom RAFIQUE‑UZ‑ZAMAN and 5 others‑‑‑Respondents
Primary Law Sindh Local Government Elections Ordinance (VIII of 2000)‑‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 271 (CLC)?

This judgment primarily cites: Sindh Local Government Elections Ordinance (VIII of 2000)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 271 (CLC)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Muhammad Roshan Essani and Muhammad Ashraf Leghari, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 271 (CLC) (GHULAM ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Makhdoom RAFIQUE‑UZ‑ZAMAN and 5 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Sindh Local Government Elections Ordinance (VIII of 2000)‑‑‑

Representation

  • Jhamat Jethanand for Petitioner.
  • Date of hearing: 31st July, 2001.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑‑Ss. 2, 3 & 14(1)(c)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑ Constitutional petition‑‑‑Eligibility to contest election of Zila Council‑‑ Nomination Form of respondent for seat of Naib‑Nazim was challenged by petitioner on the ground that he and his wife were enrolled as voters in electoral roll of Cantonment area, while they were permanent resident of another area‑‑‑Returning Officer accepted the nomination Form, which order was unsuccessfully challenged by petitioner in appeal before District Returning Officer‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Deputy Election Commissioner on application of respondent after due verification deleted his name from electoral roll of Cantonment area and entered same in electoral roll of the other area vide order, dated 7‑7‑2001, which was not challenged by the petitioner‑‑‑Chief Election Commissioner vide Notification, dated 20‑7‑2001 had clarified that local area under S.3 of the Ordinance for the purpose of elections of Zila Council would be the entire district including Cantonment areas and eligibility of candidates for elections of Zila Council would be determined accordingly under S.140)(c) of the Ordinance‑‑‑Petitioner had not challenged vires of said Notification, but had only challenged the orders passed by Returning Officer and District Returning Officer, which did not suffer from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference by High Court‑‑‑Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances. Masood A. Noorani, Addl. A.‑Q, and Hakim Ali Siddique for the Official Respondents. Hassan Mehmood Baig, Kazi Abdul Sattar and Allah Bachayo Soomro for the Private Respondents.

Judgment & Decree

(Sono Khan Baloch), Deputy Election Commissioner. Hyderabad Division and Registration Officer, Municipal Corporation and Hyderabad Cantt. Hyderabad, the 7‑7‑2001. Read application of Mr. Nawab Rashid Ali Khan son of (late) Nawab Muzaffar Hussain Khan, resident of Bungalow No. 15, Block 'B', Unit No.2, Latifabad, Hyderabad. In exercise of the powers delegated to me vide Chief Election Commissioner of. Pakistan, Islamabad's Notification No. F.14(6)/2000‑ELECPEC(S), 'dated 20‑12‑2000. I Sono Khan Baloch, Deputy Election Commissioner, Hyderabad Division and Registration Officer for Hyderabad, Municipal Corporation, after satisfying myself, hereby order to enter the name of above applicant in the relevant electoral roll, as under:‑‑‑ S.No. Name Father's/ husband's name Age as on 1‑1‑2000 N.I.C. No, Address

1. Nawab Rashid Ali Khan Nawab Muzafar Hussain Khan 44 years 450‑88‑104269 B.No.35 Civil Line, Hyder Abad

2. Sajida Rashid Wife Nawab Rashid Ali Khan of 43 years 450‑86‑235339 (Sd.) 7‑7‑2001. (Sono Khan Baloch), Deputy Election Commissioner, Hyderabad Division. In compliance to the abovesaid order the names of the respondent No.2 and his wife were deleted from electoral roll of cantonment and were entered in the electoral roll of Latifabad U.C. No.

2. The impugned orders passed by the respondent No. 3 are just and legal. The learned Additional Advocate‑General, Sindh has tiled statement alongwith relevant documents. The order, dated 28‑6‑2001 of Assistant Election Commissioner, Sindh, Karachi addressed to Deputy Election Commissioners, Larkana, Sukkur, Hyderabad and Mirpurkhas and Assistant Election Commissioner of same division has been placed on record in respect of additions, deletions and corrections of the names in the voters' list. The said order is reproduced in extenso as under:‑‑ No.E.14(43)/2000-ELEC‑PEC(S) OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL ELECTION COMMISSIONER, SINDH Pakistan Sectt. Block No.44‑A, Shahrah‑e‑Iraq, Karachi, the 28`" June, 2001. To (1) The Deputy Election Commissioner, Larkana/Sukkur/ Hyderabad/Mirpurkhas. (2) The Assistant Election Commissioner in Larkana/Sukkur/ Hyderabad/Mirpurkhas Divisions. SUBJECT: Additions Deletions and Corrections in names in the Voters' List. Sir, I am directed to forward herewit a copy of the Election Commission of Pakistan, Islamabad's Order No.F.11(22).2000(Cor (sic)), dated the 28th May, 2001 on the subject cited above for information and necessary action please. Your obedient servant. (Sd.) (Atta Rehman), Assistant Election Commissioner, (Sindh), Karachi. The learned Additional Advocate‑General, Sindh has supported the impugned order and has further argued that Election Commission of Pakistan has issued Notification in respect of the Elections of Zila (District) Council. The said letter is re produced hereinbelow in extenso:‑‑ Election House Constitution Avenue G‑5/2, Islamabad. July 20, 2001. (1) The Provincial Election Commissioner, Punjab, Lahore. (2) The Provincial Election Commissioner, Sindh, Karachi. (3) The Provincial Election Commissioner, N.‑W.,F.P., Peshawar. (4) The Provincial Election Commissioner, Balochistan, Quetta. SUBJECT: Zila Council Elections In exercise of the powers conferred upon him under Article 2 of the Local Government Elections, Order 2000 (Order No.8 of 2000) and all powers enabling him in that behalf, the Honourable Chief Election Commissioner has directed to clarify that local area under section 3 of the BNPS Local Government Elections Ordinance, 2000 for the purposes of elections of Zila (District) Councils is entire District (including cantonment areas). The; eligibility of a person to contest the abovesaid elections will beg determined accordingly under section 14(1)(c) (ibid). (Sd.) (Hassan Muhammad)' Director, General (LBE). The plain reading of this notification shows that Chief Election Commissioner has clarified that the local area under section 3 of BNPS Local Government Elections Ordinance, 2000 for the purpose of elections of Zila (District) Council is for entire District including Cantonment) areas. The eligibility of a person to contest the elections of Zila Council` will be determined accordingly under section 14(1)(c). Mr. Abdul Sattar Kazi appearing for the respondent No.2 assisted by Mr. Allah Bachayo Soomro and learned standing, counsel appearing on behalf of Dy.A.‑G. have adopted the arguments of learned Additional Advocate‑General. The perusal of record shows that the petitioner has challenged the entry of names of respondent No.2 and his wife in electoral roll of Latifabad on the basis that their names were appearing in the electoral roll of Cantonment area. The main thrust of the petitioner is that the authenticity of entry made in hand at Serial No.566 in electoral roll was untenable and illegal. The electoral roll of Latifabad contained only 562 serial numbers of votes and, therefore, the Returning Officer made reference to the respondent No.6 on 21‑7‑2001 for its clarification. The clarification letter sent to him was vague, false and frivolous. The subsequent entry in Latifabad U.C. No.2 is challenged. The two orders passed by Deputy Election Commissioner, Hyderabad Division on 7‑7‑2001 have not been challenged by the petitioner. The petitioner has also not challenged the vires of letter, dated 20th July, 2001 issued by the Assistant Election Commissioner, Karachi under the directives of Honourable Chief Election Commissioner of Pakistan, wherein the eligibility of a person to contest the Zila Council election will be determined according to the said letter as envisaged under section 14(1)(c). It appears that the petitioner has not challenged the said order but he has only filed ‑Constitution petition against the two orders passed by Returning Officer and District Returning Officer. The orders passed by the two Courts below do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and need no interference. Consequently the Constitution petition merits no consideration and is dismissed with no order as to costs alongwith the listed application. S.A.K./G‑82/K Order accordingly.