SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD, J.---This petition for leave to appeals has been filed assailing the judgment of Balochistan High Court dated 10-8-2005 in C.P. No. 395 of 2005. Vide the aforesaid judgment Balochistan High Court upheld the order of the District Returning Officer, Killa Abdullah whereby the nomination papers filed by Respondent No.1 Moulvi Muhammad Noor and Respondent No.2 Sanaullah for the seats of Nazim and Naib Nazim respectively from Union Council Sirki Talari, Chaman.
2. The petitioners had challenged the competency/qualification of both Respondents Nos.1 and 2 to contest election for the respective seats of Nazim and Naib Nazim from Union Council Sirki Talari, Chaman. The objections raised by the petitioners before the three forums were; firstly that Respondent No.1 did not possess the requisite academic qualification as the Sanad relied upon by him was neither issued by a Madarisa recognized by the competent Authority nor he passed Urdu, English and Pakistan Studies papers from any Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education in Pakistan; and secondly, that Respondent No.2 had not attained the age of 25 years as he was born on 10-8-1984 as per the certificate dated 1-8-2005 issued by the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Quetta. All the three forums referred to above, overruled the objections raised by the petitioners and held both Respondents Nos.1 and 2 eligible to contest the election for the seats of Nazim and Naib-Nazim respectively and accepted their nomination paper. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. We have heard the arguments of Malik Muhammad Qayyum, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners. Mr. Salahuddin Mengal, Advocate-General Balochistan for respondents Nos.3 and 4, Syed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents Nos.1 and 2 and Mr. Yawar Ali, Deputy Attorney General on Court's notice.
4. Malik Muhammad Qayyum, Advocate Supreme Court vehemently attacked the judgment of Balochistan High Court on the grounds that on the facts and circumstances of the case the pronouncements made therein were not at all warranted and further that it had erred in placing reliance on the Identity Cards of Respondent No.2 and ignoring the certificate of date of birth issued by the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Quetta for determining his age. He further submitted that the learned Division Bench of Balochistan High Court did not give any finding relating to the eligibility of Respondent No.1 to contest the election on consideration of questions whether: (i) the Sanad produced by him was issued by a Madrisa recognized by the University Grants Commission (hereinafter referred to as "UGC")/Higher Education Commission (hereinafter referred to as "HEC") and would be acceptable to qualify the holder thereof in accordance with section 152(1)(e) of the Balochistan Local Government Ordinance, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as the "Ordinance" of 2001), and (ii) the same was equivalent to M.A. in Arabic/Islamic Studies, thus Respondent No.1 possessed much higher qualification that the minimum qualification of matriculation provided in above referred section 152(1)(e) of the Ordinance of 2001 to contest election for the seats of Nazim/Naib Nazim.
5. Syed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Advocate Supreme Court appearing for Respondents Nos.1 and 2 supported the judgment of Balochistan High Court and submitted that the three forums had rightly placed reliance on the old and new Identity Cards, Photostat copy of Dakhil and Kharij Register, and the certificate of Headmaster, Government Taj Watan Dost Boys Middle School Doulat Abad, Chaman, which documents disclosed the date of birth of respondents No.2 as 1-1-1976, thus making him eligible to contest the election for the Seat of Nazim. He pointed out that Respondent No.2 was a Councillor in the Local Government set up .during the period from 2001 to 2005 and submitted that this very fact clearly established that Respondent No.2 was qualified age-wise to contest the election as he would 25 years of age as far back as in 2001. Relative to the competency of Respondent No.1 he submitted that he possessed a Sanad issued by Jamiat-ul-Uloom Islamia, Loralai which according to him was equivalent to M.A., thus Respondent No.1 complied with the requirement of Matriculation.
6. Mr. Yawar Ali, Deputy Attorney-General and Mr. Salahuddin Mengal, Advocate-General adopted the arguments of Malik Muhammad Qayyum, Advocate Supreme Court and submitted that the judgment of Balochistan High Court and the other two forums were not in accordance with the facts and law.
7. There are several Deeni Madrisas, which award Sanads to the students, who are taught in such Deeni Madaris. These Sanads are (i) Shahadat Al Sanviya Aama; (ii) Shahadat-Al-Sanviya Khasa;
(iii) Shahadat Al-Aliya; and (iv) Shahadat A1-Aalimiya, and claim them to be equivalent to Matric/Secondary School, Higher Secondary School, Graduation Degree and Masters Degree respectively. However, the Sanads and Degrees cannot be treated equivalent to Secondary School, Higher Secondary School, Graduation Degree and Masters Degree, unless they are awarded by a Madarisa recognized and approved by the UGC/HEC and has issued equivalence certificate in respect of Sanads of Al-Aaliya and Al-Aalamiya, and the Inter-Board Committee of Chairmen (hereinafter referred to as "IBCC") has issued equivalence certificate in respect of Sanads of Al- Sanviya Aama and AI-Sanviya Khasa. In absence of equivalence certificate from UGC/HEC, the Sanads awarded by recognized and approved Madrisa can be utilized only for teaching purposes and for pursuing higher studies in Arabic and Islamic Studies and for no other purpose. Equivalence Certificate by the UGC/HEC can be granted to a person holding the Sanad of Al-Aalimya-Fil- Uloom-U1- Arabia-Wal-Islamia provided he has passed examination in additional subjects of Elective Pakistan Studies, Islamic Studies and two additional subjects other than Arabic and Islamiat at the B.A. level. After issuance of Equivalence Certificate, the Sanad of Shahadat-ul- Aalimiya will be acceptable for the purpose of employment and the holder will also qualify to contest the Local Government election. The Sanads of Saniviya Aama and Saniviya Khasa obtained from a recognized and approved Madrisa would be equated with Secondary/High Secondary School, if the holder thereof has passed examination in English, Urdu and Islamic Studies at the said level from a Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education in Pakistan and Equivalence Certificate is issued by Inter-Board Committee of Chairmen, and he will be qualified to contest Local Government election. For the above proposition and observations reliance is placed on the judgment of this Court in Sanaullah and another v. District Returning Officer, Mianwali and others (C.P.L.A. No.1569-I of 2005) and five other Civil Petitions dated 16-8-2005.
8. Taking up the case of respondent No.1, it is to be observed that he claimed to have obtained the Sanad of Shahadat-Al-Aalimiya-Fil-Uloom-Ul-Arabia-Wal-Islamia issued by Jamia Darul Aloom Islamia, Loralai, which is not recognized and approved Madarisa. In this connection reference is made to the letters of Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education, Islamabad dated 23rd July, 2001 and Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education dated 21st July, 2005 wherein the names of Madris recognized by the UGC/HEC and IBCC have been mentioned . It is only in respect of the Sanads issued by these Madaris that a certificate referred to above can be issued by the UGC/HEC and IBCC. The names of these Madaris are as under:-- "LIST OF WAFAQ/TANZEEM AND RABITA-TUL MADARIS
1. Wafaq-ul-Madaras-ul-Arabia, Multan (Pakistan).
2. Tanzeem-ul-Madaras (Ahla-e-Sunnat), Lahore (Pakistan)
3. Wafaq-ul-Madaras Al-Sahfia (Ahle-Hadith), Faisalabad (Pakistan).
4. Raboa-tul-Madaras-e-Islamia, Lahore (Pakistan)
5. Wafaq-ul-Madaras (Shia), Lahore (Pakistan)
LIST OF OTHER RECOGNIZED MADARIS Jamia Islamia Minhaj-ul-Quran, Lahore Jamia Teleemat-e-Islamia, Faisalabad Jamia Ashrafia, Lahore Darul Uloom Mohammadia Ghousia, Sargodha Darul Uloom, Karachi.
9. The name of Jamia Darul Aloom Islamia, Loralai has not been included in the list of Madaris recognized and approved by UGC/HEC and IBCC. In the circumstances the Sanad Shandat-Al- Aalimiya held by respondent No.1 cannot confer on him the qualification provided in section 152(1)
(e) of Ordinance of 2001 for contesting the Local Government election. It may be clarified that equivalence certificate can be granted by the UGC/HEC or IBCC only in respect of the Sanads awarded by the Madaris recognized and approved by the UGC/HEC and IBCC. Accordingly, respondent No.1 is not qualified to contest Local Government Elections for the seat of Nazim.
10. Relative to the case of Respondent No.2, in view of conflict in his date of birth in the various documents produced in this Court as well as in three other forums, his original matriculation examination form was summoned from the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Quetta. From perusal thereof it transpired that Respondent No.2 had mentioned his date of birth therein as 10-8-1984. There is no doubt that date of birth of respondent No.2 in the two Identity Cards (old and new) has been shown as 1-1-1976 and according to the pronouncements made by this Court in cases of (i) Syed Akhtar Hussain Zaidi v. Muhammad Yaqinuddin (1988 SCMR 753); and
(ii) Dr. Razia Khatoon through Legal Heirs v. Dr. Roshan H. Nanji and another (1991 SCM R 840).
National Identity Card is to be treated more authentic, presumption of truth is attached to it, can be considered evidence and would held the field unless the same is rebutted by good and better evidence. Respondents No.2 had also produced photostat copies of entry from Dakhil and Kharij Register of the School and certificate purported to have been issued by Headmaster of the School in support of his date of birth being 1-1-1976. These two documents cannot be given weight for determining the age of the respondent in presence of two Identity Cards on the one hand and the certificate of date of birth issued by the Baluchistan Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Quetta dated 1-8-2005 and the Matriculation Examination Form filled in by respondent No.2 in his own handwriting on the other hand. Normally the date of birth mentioned in the Identity Card would have to be given preference over the certificate issued by the Balochistan Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Quetta and the Matriculation Examination form but in view of the facts and circumstances of this case it is found difficult to prefer the date of birth mentioned in the Identity Cards over the date of birth certificate issued by the Balochistan Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Quetta and the Matriculation Examination Form. The ground which raises doubt about the genuineness of the old Identity Card is that if the date of birth of respondents No.2 is to be accepted as 1-1-1976 then he would have attained the age of 18 E years on 1-1-1994 and was under a legal obligation to obtain the Identity Card. However, respondent No.2 did not obtain the same till 16-5-2001 i.e. after 7 years and 4-1/2 months of having attained the age of 18 years. It is highly improbable that a person on attaining the age of 18 years would not apply for issuance of Identity Card immediately and defer the same for 7 long years. It is also to be noted that on attaining the age of 18 years a person is legally required to get himself registered in accordance with the provision of section 4(a) of the National Registration Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the "N.R. Act"). Section 4(b) of N.R. Act casts a duty on the parent or guardian of every citizen who has not attained the age of 18 years to get such citizen registered under the provisions of N.R. Act. Such registration is incorporated in Form "B" to be filled in by the head of the family wherein names of all dependents in his household are to be mentioned together with their dates of birth and relationship with the head of the family. Section 8 of N.R. Act embodies various purposes for which Identity Card is necessary. Amongst others, such purposes include granting of passport, permit or other travel document for going out of Pakistan, for casting vote in an election to the National Assembly or a Provincial Assembly, Local Bodies, Cantonment Boards or other local authorities for establishing his identity. Apart from above purposes a person is also required to be in possession of the Identity Card for booking a seat or berth while travelling by trains, for obtaining driving licence, for admission in educational institutions, for sale transactions of properties and vehicles, for employment and many other purposes. The omission of respondent No.2 to apply for issuance of Identity Card prior to 2001 casts very strong doubt with regard to the veracity of his date of birth of 1-1-1976 which consequently raises adverse presumption about the genuineness of Identity Card No.618-76-018123 issued to him on 16-5-2001, thus creating a serious doubt regarding his date of birth being 1-1-1976. It was stated on behalf of respondent No.2 that he had inadvertently mentioned his date of birth while appearing in Matriculation Certificate as 10-8-1984 and on coming to know of this discrepancy had immediately applied to the Balochistan Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Quetta for correction of his date of birth. The argument does not carry any weight as the two disputed dates of birth i.e. 1-1-1976 and 10-8-1984 differ in day, month and year and show a difference of eight-years which by no imagination can be said to be accidental or by way of inadvertence. The issue could have been resolved by production of Form "B" which would have been filled in by the father of respondent No.2 as per requirement of section 4(b) of N.R. Act at the time of applying for issuance of Identity Cards but no efforts were made by respondent No.2 to summon the same for perusal thereof. Production of Form "B" had assumed great importance in view of the conflict/discrepancy appearing in the date of birth of Respondent No.2 in various documents available on record. However, neither respondent No.2 himself produced Form "B" nor caused the production of the same or of any other document from the Office of the Registration Authority to substantiate that his birth is 1-1-1976. There is yet another circumstance which compels us not to accept the date of birth of 1-1-1976 as the correct date of birth of respondent No.2. He appeared in the Secondary School Certificate Examination in 2002. If his date of birth is taken as 1-1-1976 he would be more than 26 years of age while appearing in the said examination which is most unlikely as the usual age for appearing in Matriculation/Secondary School Certificate Examination ranges from 16 to 20 years. According to the date of birth of 10-8- 1984 he would be 18 years of age, which is most likely, proper and acceptable age at which students usually pass such examinations. The probability or inference which can be had from the facts and circumstances of the case is that Respondent No.2 decided to contest Local Council Election held in 2001 for a seat of General Councillor for which he had to establish that he was twenty five years of age and in order to make himself eligible for contesting the said Election he got prepared Identity Card in January 2001 showing therein his date of birth as 1-1-1976 with mala fide and dishonest intention and ulterior motive, which would make him 25 years old at the time of Election in 2001. There is yet another circumstance which raises presumption with regard to the bona fides of respondent No.2. On these facts and circumstances we are constrained not to accept the date of birth of respondent No.2 as 1-1-1976 which is noted in the old and new Identity Cards and would give preference to the date of birth of 10-8-1984 mentioned by respondent No.2 while filling in the Matriculation Examination Form in his own handwriting for appearing in the examination of 2002 and the certificate regarding his date of birth issued by the Balochistan Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Quetta. Thus on the date of filing nomination papers i.e. July, 2005 he has not attained the age of 25 years, therefore, was not competent to contest the elections for the seat of Naib. Nazim.
11.If the version of respondent No.2 regarding his date of birth as 1-1-1976 is taken to be correct then he would be guilty of violating the provision of section 4(2) of N.R. Act, according to which he was under a statutory obligation to apply for registration and issuance of Identity Card immediately after attaining the age of 18 years. The filing of F application dated 20-4-2005 before the Balochistan Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Quetta for correction of his date of birth in the record of the Board would in view of the facts and circumstances appear to be an exercise to cover up his misdeeds. Such action of respondent No.2 does not lend any support to his contention of his date of birth being 1-1-1976.
12.For the foregoing discussion and reasons the judgment/orders of Balochistan High Court, District Returning Officer and Returning Officer cannot be said to be valid and are not sustainable.
Accordingly this petition is converted into appeal and is allowed. The judgment/orders of Balochistan High Court, District Returning Officer, Killa Abdullah and Returning Officer Chaman are set aside. Returning Officer, U.C. Sirki Talari, Chaman is directed to delete the names of Respondent No.1 Maulvi Muhammad Noor and Respondent No.2 Sanaullah from the list of contesting candidates for the seats of Nazim and Naib-Nazim respectively of Union Council Sirki Talari, Chaman, Killa Abdullah. No order as to costs.
13. The above are the reasons for our short order of even date announced in open Court.