1989 PLP 611 (MLD)
Syed ALLAH YAR SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus ELECTION AUTHORITY SIND and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 611 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, JJ |
| Parties | Syed ALLAH YAR SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus ELECTION AUTHORITY SIND and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Review‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 611 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Review‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 611 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi 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: 1989 PLP 611 (MLD) (Syed ALLAH YAR SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus ELECTION AUTHORITY SIND and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rasool Bux Unar for Petitioner
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Point not urged before High Court at time of decision of Constitutional petition, cannot be reviewed. Mir Muhammad Hamza v. Election Authority for Baluchistan 1984 CLC 318 ref.
Judgment & Decree
AJMAL MIAN, J.‑‑This Review Petition has been filed on the ground that the nomination paper of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that his name did not appear in Ward No. 3 TC Matiari, whereas in the judgment passed by this Court the ground taken is that the names of the Proposer and Seconder did not appear on the Electoral Roll of TC 3 Matiari as held by the Appellate Authority. At the time when the above petition was filed no specific ground was taken by the petitioner that the Appellate Authority had no jurisdiction to add the ground of rejection of the nomination paper, nor this was urged before us when we decided the above petition. However, Mr. Rasool Bux Unar learned counsel for the petitioner now contends that the Appellate Authority was not competent to add a new ground of rejection. Reliance has been placed on the case of Mir Muhammad Hamza v. Election Authority for Baluchistan reported in 1984 CLC
318. It will suffice to observe that since this point was not urged before us when we had decided the above petition, we are not inclined to review the order, particularly in view of the fact that the election has already taken place. The Review petition is dismissed. H.B.T./A‑485/K Review petition dismissed.