' MUHAMMAD JEHANGIR ARSHAD, J.---Through this constitutional petition a prayer has been made for declaring the election of respondent No,4 Zulfiqar Ali as void and without lawful authority, on the ground that as Zulfiqar respondent No,4 at the time of filing of his Nomination Papers for the seat of Nazim of U.C. No,65 Tehsil Jatoi, Muzafargarh was not holding the requisite educational qualification in terms of section 152(e) of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 2001, hence was either disqualified to contest the said election or his election for the said office as elective officer is liable to be declared as without lawful authority and of no legal effect and since the candidature of respondent No,4 was joint with respondent No,5, therefore, both the respondents were liable to be declared ineligible for contesting the election of Nazim as well as Naib Nazim of the said Union Council under the principle of sinker. This writ petition came up for hearing before me on 25-8- 2005 and was disposed of with the following directions:-- "For the reasons detailed in my judgment of even date passed in connected Writ Petition No,5039/2005, this writ petition is also allowed in the same terms as stated in para. 9 of the above- referred main judgment."
2. Respondents Nos.4 and 5 challenged the said order through I.C.A. No,175/2005 and the learned Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 13-9-2005 allowed the same holding that the said order dated 25-8-2005 was passed without notice and hearing the appellants (respondents Nos.4 and 5), the case was remanded with the direction that same shall be deemed to be pending for hearing and decision afresh after hearing the parties.
3. Before hearing this case on merits, the learned counsel for the contesting respondents Nos.4 and 5 has argued that since Election._ Tribunals within the meaning of rule 65 of Punjab Local Government Elections Rules, 2005 have been constituted w.e.f, 26-8-2005, therefore, all the election disputes have to be agitated before the Election Tribunal, and this writ petition is not maintainable in the presence of said alternate remedy. It is further argued that one of the petitioners namely Mian Muhammad Altaf is also not holding the requisite qualification in terms of section 152(e), hence had no locus standi to file this writ petition, notwithstanding the fact that no objection about his said disqualification was raised before the Returning Officer or the District Returning Officer at the time of scrutiny of Nomination Papers. The learned counsel therefore, has argued that constitutional jurisdiction being equitable one, cannot be exercised in favour of a person like the petitioner on the ground that "he who seeks equity must do equity".
4. On the other hand, Mr. Tahir Mehmood, Advocate has argued that the question of disqualification of the petitioners cannot be gone into at this stage, as nobody raised such an objection before the Returning Officer at the time of scrutiny of Nomination Papers and petitioners contested the election without any such objection or any conditional order by any competent authority.
5. I have considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties.
6. In this case, both sets of candidates i.e, the petitioners as well as respondents Nos.4 and 5 who contested the election of Nazim and Naib Nazim are holding the certificate less than matriculation or Secondary School Certificate issued by Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education in Pakistan and are banking upon the Asnads issued by different religious institutions claiming the same to be equivalent to the Certificate of matriculation or Secondary, School Certificate issued by Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education in Pakistan. I am therefore, satisfied that petitioners have no right to challenge the qualification of respondents Nos.4 and 5 by way of filing this constitutional petition, especially when they are also sailing in the same boat and the constitutional jurisdiction being discretionary and equitable one, cannot be exercised in favour of a person who has himself not come to the Court with clean hands, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Raunaq Ali's case (PLD 1973 SC 236). This petition therefore, is dismissed. The petitioners may, however, if so advised, challenge the election of respondents Nos.4 and 5 by way of filing Election Petition.