ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,

CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD.

C.P.No.D- 2285 of 2018

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

11.07.2018.

Mr. Zahoor A. Baloch, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Allah Bachayo Soomro, Additional A.G.

Mr. Jan Ali Junejo, Assistant Attorney General-II.

Mr. Liaquat Ali Sangrasi, Advocate for Election Commission of Pakistan.

This is a constitution petition, wherein the petitioner has impugned the decision of Returning Officer dated 19.06.2018 and the order of learned Appellate Tribunal dated 23.06.2018, wherein the petitioner has not been entertained in respect of his nomination form for NA 227 Hyderabad-III.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that nomination papers of the petitioner were not accepted on account of failure of providing the exclusive account at the proper stage although he had submitted the account of Allied Bank Limited in his nomination form and also filed an application for extension of time in this regard and at the time of scrutiny had submitted details of a new account with National Bank of Pakistan; that this element has not been considered properly at the appellate stage also as such the petitioner has not been entertained for his nomination in violation of his fundamental rights.

3. Learned A. A. G. however, contends that the petitioner was required to open the account at the time of submission of nomination papers as required under section 60 (2) (b) and the same was not done at the proper time.

4. Learned Assistant Attorney General as well as learned counsel for ECP support the impugned orders and adopt the arguments of learned A.A.G.

5. In rebuttal learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Section 133 of the Election Act, 2017 requires an exclusive account at the time of scrutiny which was present and as such the petitioner has not been entertained despite having right to be considered in this respect.

6. Having heard the learned counsel and gone through the record. It is observed that apparently there was failure on the part of petitioner to submit the account at the proper time i.e. at the time of filing of the nomination papers. It is further observed that Section 133 requiring an exclusive account for the purpose of election expenses which is to be specified at the stage of submission of nomination papers under section 60 (2) (b). It is further observed that the petitioner had filed the application requiring extension of time for submitting the details of exclusive account with the Returning Officer which were also submitted however, the same were absent at the proper stage. We have discussed the relevant law in another petition bearing C.P.No.D-2315/2018, wherein it has been held by us that “any variation to specific law must require some simple and reasonable explanation”. We find that in the present case also a reasonable explanation is absent. Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments though had contended that petitioner was under the impression that the account already maintained by him would be sufficient, as such had not attempted to open a new account at the proper time, is not found sufficient as the declaration before the Returning Officer clearly specifies the opening of an account (khulwaya he) is present in paragraph No.3 of the statement on Oath given by the petitioner himself on 11.06.2018, wherein as already discussed the account mentioned was of the Allied Bank Limited as referred above. We also find that the matter of account is found discussed in the impugned orders and as such we do not find any violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioner in the impugned orders. Resulting thereby the instant petition being devoid of merits requiring entertainment was dismissed with costs by our short order dated 11.07.2018 and these are the reasons thereof.

JUDGE

Tufail