P L D 2025 Balochistan 149
Before Muhammad Ejaz Swati and Shaukat Ali Rakhshani, JJ
SABIRA ASAD ---Petitioner
Versus
SAAD BIN ABDULLAH and another ---Respondents
Constitution Petition No. 126 of 2024, decided on 2nd February, 2024.
Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017) ---
----Ss.62 & 104(3) ---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199--- Submission/ scrutiny of nomination
papers for reserved seats ---Powers of Returning Officer of the constituency---Transgression --
-Invoking constitutional jurisdiction of High Court ---Scope ---Petitioner (a political party
nominated candidate) filed constitutional petition as Returning Officer of her constituency
for general seats rejected her nomination papers for reserved seats for women---Validity ---
Petitioner submitted two nomination papers before Returning Office of relevant constituency at the relevant office, one for general seat for the National Assembly and second for the reserved seat of women for National Assembly from her political party--- Record reveals that
the nomination papers for the reserved seats for women from her political party were rejected by the said RO ---Indisputably, though the said RO was authorized and competent to
scrutinize the nomination papers of the candidates from the said constituency for general
seats, but had absolutely no authority and power either to accept or reject the nomination
papers of a party nominated candidate for the reserved seats as per priority list ---Provincial
Election Commissioner (PEC) was appointed as Returning Officer for the seats reserved for
women and non- Muslims, thus, he (PEC/RO) was competent alone for receipt of nomination
papers, scrutiny and decision thereon---In the present case, the petitioner had filed nomination papers for reserved seats for women before the RO of the constituency instead of filing the same before the PEC/RO, which error could have been rectified and corrected by the RO of constituency either by transmitting the nomination papers to the PEC/RO or could have returned the nomination papers to the petitioner to file the same before the competent Returning Officer i.e. (PEC/RO), but the RO of constituency rejected her nomination papers without any lawful authority and jurisdiction, which indeed was required to be rectified and corrected by High Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Art. 199 of the Constitution in order to meet the ends of justice as an aggrieved person cannot be left remediless ---High
Court declared the order of rejection of the nomination papers null and void and directed the matter to be transmitted to the Provincial Election Commissioner being RO of the reserved seats for women, who after due scrutiny shall render decision thereon forthwith in accordance with law ---Consti -tutional petition was allowed accordingly.
Khalid Ahmed Kubdani and Ghulam Mohi -ud-Din Sasoli for Petitioner.
Shehzad Aslam, AD Law and Naseer Ahmed, Senior Personal Assistant ECP for
Official Respondents.
Date of hearing: 1st February, 2024.
JUDGMENT
SHAUKAT ALI RAKHSHANI, J. ---The instant constitutional petition has been
filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 ("Constitution") by the petitioner, which carries the following relief; -
"It is respectfully most respectfully prayed that while keeping in view the above made humble submissions, narrations, facts and circumstances, this Honorable Court may kindly be pleased to call the nomination papers of petitioner from the respondent No. 1 and the instant petition may kindly be allowed by issuing direction to the respondent No.2 to include the name of petitioner in the final list of reserved seat for women National Assembly. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and
proper may also be awarded in favor of petitioner. This will meet the ends of justice.".
2. Facts relevant to the lis in hands are that the petitioner being member of the National
Party filed two nomination papers, one for general seat NA -262, Quetta -I for the National
Assembly and one for the reserved seat of women for National Assembly from her party,
who was called for scrutiny on 26.12.2023 by Returning Officer -Assistant Commissioner,
City Quetta of National Assembly ("RO of NA -262"). Petitioner stated that she appeared
before the said RO along with proposer and seconder, who securitized both of her nomination papers and accepted both the nomination papers.
However, subsequently, on 24.01.2024, when the petitioner visited the website of
Provincial Election Commissioner, Balochistan (respondent No.2), her name was not enlisted, thus, she immediately approached respondent No.2, who was informed that the petitioner had not submitted her nomination papers in his office, being the RO for the reserved seats for women, hence this petition.
3. Heard. Record perused with the able assistance of learned counsel for the petitioner
and Assistant Director, Election Commission of Pakistan ("ECP").
4. The petitioner submitted two nomination papers, one for general seat NA -262,
Quetta -I for the National Assembly and second for the reserved seat of women for National
Assembly from National Party in the office RO of NA -262, Quetta -I, who after scrutiny
accepted both her nomination papers. Record reflects that the nomination papers for the
reserved seats for women from National Party were rejected by the RO of NA -262-Quetta -I,
thus, the stance of the petitioner that her nomination papers for the reserved seats was
accepted does not coincide with the record.
Indisputably, the RO of NA -262, Quetta -I was authorized and competent to securitize
the nomination papers of the candidates from the said constituency for general seats, but had
absolutely no authority and power either to accept or reject the nomination papers of a party
nominated candidate for the reserved seats as per priority list. The Provincial Election Commissioner, Balochistan (respondent No.2) was appointed as RO for the seat reserved for women and Non -muslims, thus, he was competent alone for receipt of nomination papers,
scrutiny and decision thereon.
5. In the instant case, the petitioner had filed nomination papers for reserved seats for
women before the RO of NA -262 instead of filing the same before the RO (respondent
No.2), which error could have been rectified and corrected by the RO of NA -262, Quetta -I
either by transmitting the nomination papers to the RO (respondent No.2) or could have returned the nomination papers to the petitioner to file the same before the competent Returning Officer i.e., (respondent No.2), but the RO of NA -262 rejected the nomination
papers of the petitioner without any lawful authority and jurisdiction, which indeed requires to be rectified and corrected by this Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution in order to meet the ends of justice as an aggrieved person cannot be left remediless.
6. For what has been discussed hereinabove, the petition is partly accepted and
consequently the order of rejection of the nomination papers is declared null and void and same shall be deemed pending, which is directed to be transmitted to the RO of the reserved seats for women i.e, respondent No.2, who after due scrutiny shall render decision thereon forthwith in accord ance with law.
MQ/136/Bal. Order accordinglThis judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.