IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Constitutional Petition No.D-520 of 2018

 

                             Present:

                                                Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro,

Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah,

 

Petitioners                :   Through Mr.Asif Ali Abdul Razak Soomro, Advocate.

 

Respondents           :    Through Mr.Rafique Ahmed K. Abro, Advocate for Election Commission of Pakistan &

 

Mr.Abdul Rasheed Abro, Assistant Attorney General Pakistan.   

 

Date of hearing    :       19.07.2018          

Date of decision      :    19.07.2018                   

 

O R D E R  

 

 

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J- The petitioners by way of filing an application before the learned District Returning officer Kashmore @ Kandhkot, sought for change of voters blocks and establishment of new Polling Stations as is detailed in their application. It was dismissed by learned District Returning officer Kashmore @ Kandhkot vide order dated 20.06.2018, such order the petitioners have impugned before this Court by way of instant constitutional petition.          

2.                It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the change of voters block and establishment of new Polling Stations were essential for convenience of the public but their application was dismissed by learned District Returning Officer, Kashmore @ Kandhkot, without any lawful justification. By contending so, they sought for direction against Election Commission of Pakistan to shift and establish new polling stations as per their request made in their application.

3.                In rebuttal to above, it is contended by learned counsel for Election Commission of Pakistan as well as learned Assistant Attorney General Pakistan that the final list of the Polling Stations has already been published in Official Gazette, the change of voters block and establishment of new Polling Stations at the instance of petitioners would hamper the Election process badly. By contending so, they sought for dismissal of the instant constitutional petition.

4.                We have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

5.                As per Sub Section (1) to Section 59 of Elections Act, 2017, it is the Election Commission of Pakistan, which has to provide, in prescribed format, list of Polling Stations for each constituency. It was done in the present case. As per Sub Section (5) to Section 59 of Elections Act, 2017, any voter may file objection or suggestion on the list of Polling Stations so provided by Election Commission of Pakistan, with the District Returning Officer concerned within the specified period. The petitioners by way of making an application with District Returning Officer, Kashmore @ Kandhkot straight away sought for change of voters block and establishment of new Polling Stations as is detailed in their application. It was dismissed by learned District Returning Officer, Kashmore @ Kandhkot, after proper enquiry, as per mandate contained by Sub Section (6) to Section 59 of Elections Act, 2017. At present, as per learned counsel for the Election Commission of Pakistan and learned Assistant Attorney General Pakistan, the final list of the Polling Stations has already been published in Official Gazette, the same as per Sub Section (8) to Section 59 of Elections Act, 2017 is not subject to change, save in very exceptional circumstances, that too without prior approval of Election Commission of Pakistan and after notice to the candidates. No exceptional circumstance is advanced by the petitioners for change of voters block and establishment of new Polling Stations. There hardly remains 05 days in General Elections. In such situation, no case for issuance of direction to Election Commission of Pakistan to change voters block or to establish new Polling Stations is made out. The learned District Returning Officer, Kashmore @ Kandhkot, by dismissing the application of the petitioners for change of voters block and establishment of new Polling Stations apparently has committed no wrong, which could be made right by this Court in exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction.

6.                For the above said reasons, the instant constitutional petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

                                                                                           J U D G E

                                                                    J U D G E

--