ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

C.P No. D – 580 of 2016

Date	Order with signature of Judge

For Katcha Peshi.

02-03-2016

Mr. Mujeeb-ur-Rehman, advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Qurban Ali Malano, advocate a/w respondent No.3.

Mr. Liaquat Ali Shar, learned Additional Advocate General, Sindh a/w Ghanwar Khan Khoso, Returning Officer, Town Committee, Salehpat.

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

Through instant petition, the petitioner has challenged the nomination of respondent No.3 Gul Hassan Shah s/o Faiz Muhammad Shah s/o Faiz Muhammad Shah to contest election on the special seat of Hari in respect of forthcoming Local Bodies Elections, for Town Committee Salehpat, on the ground that respondent No.3 does not fall within the definition of “HARI”, as according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he owns more than 100 acres agricultural land. Learned counsel has referred Subsection (g) of Section 2 of Land Utilization Notification dated 20.11.1972, issued by the Government of Sindh.

Notices were issued to the respondents, pursuant to which Mr. Qurban Ali Malano, advocate has filed his vakalatnama for respondent No.3 and raised objection as to maintainability of instant petition on the ground that the petitioner did not raise any objections before the Returning Officer nor filed any appeal against the acceptance of the nomination form of the respondent No.3 before Election Tribunal and directly approached this court by agitating these disputed facts. It has been further submitted that the elections are scheduled tomorrow, whereas there is hardly any time left with the respondent No.3 to specifically controvert the allegations as leveled by the petitioner and documents annexed in the petition including the photocopies of the documents attached with the petition, hence requests that instant petition may be dismissed, as it has been filed with malafide intention only to prevent the respondent No.3 from contesting the forthcoming elections which are scheduled tomorrow (i.e.3.3.2016).

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the record, which reflects that petitioner did not file any objections before the Returning Officer on the nomination form of the respondent No.3, which has been duly accepted nor any appeal has been filed before Election Tribunal within prescribed period of time by raising such objection. However, the above allegations have been leveled for the first time in the instant petition, whereas, elections are scheduled to be held tomorrow i.e. 3.3.2016.

We are not inclined to entertain instant petition at this stage or to pass any restraining orders in respect of the elections scheduled to be held tomorrow, merely on the allegation and the disputed facts agitated through instant petition by the petitioner who is also a contesting candidate.

Accordingly, instant petition is dismissed along with listed application. However, the petitioner is at liberty to seek remedy in accordance with law by approaching the Election Commission/Election Tribunal challenging the eligibility/candidature of the respondent No.3, if so advised.

Judge

Judge

Abdul Salam/P.A