Pakistan Case Law← Search
K.L.R. 2006 S.C. 10

Muhammad Saeed Awan And Another vs District Returning Officer, Attock And Other

CitationK.L.R. 2006 S.C. 10
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No. 2143 of 2005
Date2005-08-16
Judge(s)Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, Sayed
ResultPetition Allowed

ORDER

IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J.-- ln pursuance of our order dated 15th August, 2005, Hamid Akhtar, Tehsildar Attock appeared and produced the record of Khasra No. 428, Mauza Tajak District Attock and confirmed that on 26th July, 2005, this property was entered on the name of Safdar Hussain the brother of the petitioner and it was attested on laters name on 27th July, 2005. He further confirmed revenue document dated 1st August, ^005 produced by the respondents in the Court to substantiate that property still exist on the name of Akbar Khan son of Ghulam Rabbahi is a fake document. According to him, it has not been issued by the office of the Tehsildar Attock. Be that as it may, in presence of original record, we are inclined to hold that on 26th July, 2005, when nomination papers were submitted by Akbar Khan, petitioner No. 2 he was not owner of the property as he had already sold it to his brother as per entries of Revenue Record. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that Akbar Khan had sold the property to his brother at minimum value with mala i.e intentions. Be that as it may, it is a fact that on 26th July, 2005, petitioner No. 2 was not owner of the property, therefore, he was not obliged to make disclosures of his assets in nomination papers.

3. Thus for the foregoing reasons, petition is converted into appeal and allowed. The impugned judgment dated 8.8.2005 and order passed by the Appellate Court dated 2nd of August, 2005 are set aside and the order of Returning Officer, dated 21st August, 2005 is restored. The Returning Officer of Union Council No. 17, Shamshabad is directed to include the name of the petitioners in the list of contesting candidates for the office of Nazim and Naib Nazim.

4. The District Coordination Officer, Attock is directed to conduct an enquiry and fix responsibility that who had prepared document dated 1st August, 2005 wherein it has been indicated that Akbar Khan was owner of the property up to 1.3.2005. On completion of enquiry he would launch criminal proceedings against the person(s), responsible for the same.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search