P L D 1988 Karachi 73 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE‑‑Petitioner Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND RETURNING OFFICER, TANDO ALLAHYAR and another‑‑ Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1988 Karachi 73 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE‑‑Petitioner Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND RETURNING OFFICER, TANDO ALLAHYAR and another‑‑ Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1988 Karachi 73 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1988 Karachi 73 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1988 Karachi 73 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE‑‑Petitioner Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND RETURNING OFFICER, TANDO ALLAHYAR and another‑‑ Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Hameed Siddiqui for Petitioner.
- Abdul Rahim Kazi, Addl. A.‑G for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 28th November, 1987.
Headnotes / Summary
Sind Local Government Ordinance (XII of 1979)‑‑ ‑‑‑ Ss. 33, 34 & 35‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973),Art.199‑‑ Election‑‑ Candidate led to believe by voters' list published by Election Authority that his proposer and seconder were the residents of relevant electoral unit ‑‑Nomination papers of candidate rejected on the ground that proposer and seconder were actually not enrolled in said constituency‑‑ Held, a citizen should not suffer any prejudice or loss on account to‑act or omission on the part of the Government functionary‑‑ High Court observed that it was just and proper to direct Returning Officer to accept fresh nomination papers of the said candidate in case he wished to contest election if he could get competent proposer and seconder from the relevant constituency subject to compliance of the relevant law and right of the third parties.
Judgment & Decree
AJMAL MIAN, J.‑‑ This petition is directed against the orders dated 13‑11‑1987 and dated 18‑11‑1987 passed by Respondents 1 and 2 respectively rejecting the petitioner's nomination paper from Unit No. MC‑7, Tando Allahyar on the ground that the proposer and seconder are not enrolled in MC
7. The petitioner being aggrieved by the above orders has filed the present writ petition.
2. In support of the above petition, Mr. Hameed Siddiqui has referred to the official voters list issued by the Election Authority, which is at page 13 and the caption of the above list reads as follows: The name of the proposer and seconder are mentioned at S. Nos. 9 and 12 of the above voters list and in the column of address the name of the Mohallah given is 'Hajjam Para'.
3. On the other hand, Mr. Abdul Rahim Kazi, learned Additional Advocate‑General has referred to official copy of the de‑limitation list which indicates that factually 'Hajjam Para' falls under MC
6. It has, therefore, been contended by Mr. Kazi that for the purpose of deciding the question of the local area, the de‑limitation list is to be seen and not the voters list. Technically the above submission seems to be correct but the fact remains that the above voters list with the caption of Unit No. 7 was issued by the Election Authority and, therefore, the petitioner was led to believe that the proposer and seconder are the residents of MC 7 as mentioned in the voters list and, therefore, he got the proposer and seconder on the basis of the above voters list.
4. In our view, a citizen cannot suffer any prejudice or loss on account of act or omission on the part of the Government functionary. However, we cannot direct Respondent No. 1 to accept the nomination paper in question after having seen the de‑limitation list, indicating that 'Hajjam Para' falls under MC 6, but we are of the view, that it will be just and proper to direct Respondent No. 1 to accept fresh nomination papers of the petitioner by tomorrow upto 12‑00 noon, in case the petitioner wishes to contest the election even now, if he can get the competent proposer and seconder from the Constituency MC 7 subject to compliance of the Ordinance and the Rules and subject to the right of the third parties. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. M. B. A. /M‑342/ K Order accordingly.