ORDER SHEET

HIGH COURT OF SINDH CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD

C.P No.D-2566 of 2022

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

Mr. Ameer Hamza Jatoi, advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Imdad Ali Unar, Advocate for respondent No.3.

Mr. Ashfaque Nabi Qazi, Asst. Attorney General Pakistan along with Zaheer Abbas, Law Officer ECP.

Mr. Allah Bachayo Soomro, Addl. A.G Sindh

Date of hearing: 18.07.2022

Date of decision: 20.07.2022

***

The petitioner’s grievance is that Returning Officer Municipal Committee Dadu rejected his nomination papers on the ground that his proposer’s signature did not match with that available in his CNIC and when the petitioner filed Election Appeal No.99 of 2022, the Appellate Authority Dadu upheld the order of the RO MC Dadu and rejected the nomination papers of the petitioner while observing that since the petitioner was not from the same ward where he was wishing to contest from, he could not contest the elections at all. However, it is pertinent to note here that in C.P No.D-644 of 2022 dated 24.06.2022, it was observed by this Court that:-

“under Section 37 of the Act a person contesting for the District Council membership, may contest the election from any Union Council of the District and the person contesting for the membership of Town Committee or Municipal Committee may contest the election from any Ward of the respective Committee provided that his proposer and seconder are registered voters of the concerned Union Council or Ward as the case may be.”

A perusal of the above shows that S. 37(2) provides that a person contesting for Municipal Committee may contest elections from any ward of the respective committee. It is a matter of record that the petitioner belongs to Ward No.3 of Municipal Committee Dadu and sought to contest elections from the same Municipal Committee’s Ward No.13 which is permissible. A perusal of the nomination papers submitted by the petitioner show that the Returning Officer Municipal Committee Dadu had initially accepted the same on 19.06.2022 but then rejected the same on the ground that the signature of the candidate’s proposer did not match the signature from his CNIC. Then the concerned Returning Officer passed a separate order dated 21.06.2022 which was two (02) days after the final scrutiny of nomination papers and observed that Rule 18(3)(d) of the Sindh Local Council (Election) Rules 2015 required that the signature of the proposer and seconder match the signatures on their CNIC. However, it is observed that Rule 18(3)(d) does not require the signature to be the same, but merely requires that the signature be genuine. Rule 18(3)(b) is reproduced hereunder for reference:-

18(3)(d). the signature of the proposer or the seconder is not genuine:

To this extent, the proposer of the petitioner was present and admitted his signature on the same, however it completely lost sight of the returning officer who, with clear malafide, rejected the nomination papers of the petitioner. A copy of the relevant documents is reproduced hereunder for reference:

Therefore, the impugned order dated 25.06.2022 is set-aside. Instant constitutional petition is allowed and the Returning Officer is directed to issue a revised list of contesting candidates by entering the name of the petitioner in that list for Ward No.13.

Before parting with this order, we have observed that the Returning Officer Municipal Committee Dadu has failed to discharge his duties as required by the law and has tampered with the official record. As such, the learned Chief Election Commissioner of Pakistan is directed to initiate departmental proceedings against the delinquent returning officer/District Election Commissioner Dadu under GOVERNMENT SERVANTS (EFFICIENCY AND DISCIPLINE) RULES, 1973 and submit such report to this Court through the Additional Registrar for perusal in chamber. Office is directed to communicate a copy of this order through fax to the Chief Election Commissioner for compliance.

JUDGE