| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1985 SLG 3801 = 1985 SLD 3801 = 1985 PLJ 166 |
Sindh High Court
Const. Petition No. D-78, of 1985, decided on 29-1-1985.
Presented By: ABDUL HAYEE KURFSHI, CJ & SALEEM AKHTAR, J
Mr. S. Abrar Hassan, Advocate for Petitioners. Date of hearing : 29-1-1985.
Const. Petition No. D-78, of 1985, decided on 29-1-1985.
Presented By: ABDUL HAYEE KURFSHI, CJ & SALEEM AKHTAR, J
Mr. S. Abrar Hassan, Advocate for Petitioners. Date of hearing : 29-1-1985.
GHULAM RASOOL and Another—Petitioners
VERSUS
RETURNING OFFICER, Malir Cantt : Karachi and 2 Others—Respondents
Law:
Section:
(i) Writ Jurisdiction — -------- Alternative remedy—Failure to avail—Effect of—Petitioners notavailing any of remedies provided under law—Held : Point not to be agitated before High Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction. [P. 168]B (ii) Interpretation o! Statutes— ------ Legislature—Intention of—Held : Legislature when wishes to pro­ vide for limited remedy or remedies only to limited class of persons, it generally says so succinctly. [P. 168],4 (iii) Quo Warranto -------- Writ of—Held : Right to move High Court for grant of remedyin nature of quo warranto to dwell in every individual. [P 169]C order The present petition has be'cn filed by Ghulani Rasool and Ghulam Mustafa, who claim to be voters in National Assembly Constituency No. 196, to a seat, which is described as "Karachi 7". The grievance of these petitioners is that respondent Muhammad Ramzan. who is described in the title of the petition as "son of not known, Muslim, adult, residing at 125, Haji Rahim Khan G:>th, Model Colony, Karachi", and who has offered himself for election to the National Assembly and whose nomination paper has been filed, scrutinised and accepted, is not entitled to contest for reason of disqualification contemplated by sub-section (8) of section 10 of the Houses of Parliament and Provincial Assemblies (Election) Order, 1977 (P. O. No. 5/1977). This provision contemplates disqualification on the following terms :— "(8) if he, whether by himself or by any person or body of persons in trust for him or for his benefit or on his account or as a member of a Hindu undivided family, has any share or interest in a con­tract, not being a contract between a cooperative society and Government, for the supply of goods to, or for the execution of any contract or the performance of any services undertaken by Government" Admittedly, none of the two petitioners objected to the filing of the nomination paper, nor appeared at the time of scrutiny of the nomination papers, nor did they file an appeal against the acceptance of nomination ppers.…