PERVEZ ALI SHAH Versus RETURNING OFFICER/ ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KHAIRPUR
ORDER
1. NASIR ASLAM ZAHID, J.‑‑ The petitioner's nomination papers against the Units Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of Municipal Committee, Khairpur for the election scheduled to be held on 30‑11‑1987 have been rejected. According to para. 8 of the memo of petition, the reason for rejection of petitioner's nomination papers is that he is a previous convict. When this matter came up before us yesterday, it was admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had been convicted by a Summary Military Court in 1985 for one year and then he was released after three months, the balance sentence having been remitted. On this statement being made by the learned counsel, it was pointed out to him that, in the circumstances, the case of the petitioner apparently fell under section 37(2)(c) of the Sind Local Government Ordinance, 1979. Learned counsel requested for further time to make further preparations and, on his request, this matter was adjourned for today.
2. We have heard further arguments from Mr. Mohammad Hanif Mangi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel had initially argued on the assumption that the provision for disqualification requires conviction for an offence involving moral turpitude. Apparently, in that context, learned counsel has cited 1984 S C M R 2272 and 1987 S C M R 468. It may be observed here that the relevant provision for the present elections is section 37(2)(c) of the Sind Local Government Ordinance, 1979 and it reads as follows:‑
3. "He has, on conviction for any offence, been sentenced to imprisonment and a period of three years or such less period as Government may, in any case specify, has not elapsed from the date of expiration of the period of sentence."
4. The provision about the offence involving the moral turpitude has been deleted. It may further be pointed out that previously the relevant provision was that there should be a conviction for two years but the condition of two years has also been deleted. As the provision stands today on the statute book, the obvious interpretation is that if any candidate has been convicted for any offence for which he has been sentenced to imprisonment and a period of three years or such less period as may be specified by the Government has not elapsed from the date of expiration of the period of sentence, the candidate is disqualified. There appears to be no ambiguity in the provision.
5. It was next argued that the conviction by a Martial Law Court is not included in the words 'conviction for any offence'. We do not find any merit in the submission, in view of the plain language employed by the Legislature.
6. It was also submitted by the learned counsel that the principle of natural justice has been violated. Reliance has also been placed o 1984 C L C 2929 in this regard. In the instant case, the submission loses merit as admission has been made before us yesterday that the petitioner had been convicted by the Summary Military Court in 198 A and sentenced to one year's imprisonment. In view of this admission the case of the petitioner falls within the mischief of section 37(2)(c) of the Sind Local Government Ordinance, 1979.
7. We find no merit in this petition. Constitutional Petition No. D‑309 of 1987 is dismissed in limine.
8. C.M.A. No. 791 of 1987 has become infructuous.
9. M . Y . H . / P‑47/ K Petition dismissed.