MUHAMMAD SAEED Versus REAR ADMIRAL S. IQTIDAR HUSSAIN

1. ABDUL RAZAK A. THAHIM, J.‑‑ The petitioner, Sahibzada Muhammad Saeed and Respondent No. 3, Hafiz Abdul Qadeer filed nomination papers for contesting the election from Ward No. 2 of Karachi Cantonment Board. The nomination paper of Respondent No. 3, was rejected by the Respondent No. 2, Returning Officer. In appeal, the Respondent No. 1, President Karachi Cantonment Board, set aside the order of the Returning Officer and accepted the nomination paper of Respondent No. 3. We have heard Mr. Shamsuddin Khalid Ahmed for the Petitioner. It is contended by the learned Counsel that Respondent No. 3, has got pecuniary interest in the Cantonment Board as he got allotted one plot in favour of his son. In support, he has submitted copy of the proceedings of the meeting of the Cantonment Board, held on 6‑10‑1987. The contention of Mr. Shamsuddin Khalid Ahmed is that Respondent No. 3, stands disqualified from contesting the Election. In order to appreciate, we would like to reproduce section 15‑B of the Cantonment Act, 1924, which is as follows: ‑‑

2. "15‑B. Qualification and disqualification of members.‑‑ (1) A person who is not less than twenty‑one years o age on the first day of January preceding the election shall be qualified to be elected as a member of a Board if his name appears for the time being on the electoral roll of the ward from which he seeks election and he is not subject to any disqualification for being elected as, and for being a member of a Board.

(2) A person shall be disqualified for being elected as and for being a member of, a Board if he‑‑

(a) has ceased to be citizen of Pakistan or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign state or has made a declaration of allegiance or adherence to a foreign state;

(b) is an undischarged insolvent;

(c) has been ordered to execute a bond under section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act V of 1898), or has on conviction for an offence involving moral turpitude, been sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than six months, unless five years or such less period as the Federal Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, specify in this behalf, have elapsed from the date of the expiration of the period of the bond or sentence, as the case may be;

(d) is a whole‑time salaried official in the service of Government or a public statutory corporation, a corporation under the control of Government, a Board or a local body or other local authority;

(e) is under contract for work to be done or goods to be supplied to the Board to which he seeks election or has otherwise any pecuniary interest in its affairs;

(f) fails to take oath of membership of the Board or to declare his properties as required under this Act; or

(g) is for the time being disqualified for the membership of an elective body under any law for the time being in force.

3. A person can only be disqualified under Clause (e) provided he is under contract for work to be done or goods to be supplied the Board to which he seeks election or has otherwise any pecuniary interest in its affairs. The Board amounts the Cantonment Board. From the record, it is clear that Respondent No. 3, himself has not been allotted any plot or has any pecuniary interest. Due to the pecuniary interest of his son or any family members, no one can be deprived of contesting the election as he is not disqualified on this allegation.

4. We are of the view that this Constitution Petition is misconceived and has no merit and as such it is dismissed in limine.

5. A . A . / M‑358/ K Petition dismissed.