OMAR SIAL, J.---- The petitioner has challenged the final delimitation order dated 16-4-2018 passed by the Election Commission of Pakistan ("ECP") in respect of PS-7, PS-8 and PS-9 of District Shikarpur . The petitioner intends to contest the General Elections, 2018 from District Shikarpur .
2. District Shikarpur has been allocated three Provincial Assembly seats for the General Elections, 2018. These are numbered PS-7, PS-8 and PS-9. After the preliminary delimitation list was issued by the Election Commission of Pakistan on 5-3-2018, ECP invited representations from all stakeholders of the constituencies to give their suggestions and recommendations on the delimitation. Consequently , 22 representations were filed (including the one made by the petitioner). The petitioner's name finds mention at serial number 14 on the list of petitioners in the impugned order . In the representation made by the petitioner , he suggested the following amendments:
(i) P.S.-7 should be delimited to contain the entire Taluka Shikarpur including TC Mari of STC Lakhi.
(ii) P.S.-8 should be delimited to contain the entire Taluka Khanpur including the following five areas from Taluka Lakhi: TC Taib of STC Lakhi STC Rustam of Taluka Lakhi STC Bhirkan of Taluka Lakhi Town Committee Rustam of STC Rustam Town Committee of STC Bhirkan
(iii) P.S.-9 should be delimited to contain the entire Taluka Garhi Yaseen and the following five areas of Taluka Lakhi: TC Jehan Khan of STC Lakhi TC Jhali Kalwari of STC Lakhi TC Lakhi of STC Lakhi TC W azirabad of STC Lakhi Town Committee Lakhi
3. On 16-4-2018, the ECP rejected all the representations made, however , amended the delimitation to exclude TC Udha from PS-7 and include the same in PS-9.
4. A preliminary perusal of the suggestions made by the petitioner to the ECP sugg ests that the petitioner perhaps was desirous to change the delimitation of the entire constituency in accordance with his wishes.
5. During these proceedings however , the learned counsel of the petitioner limited his argument to the following:
(a) The delimitation as carried out by the ECP has resulted in a 14% variation within the three constituencies as the population of P.S.-8 is substantially large r than- the other provincial seat constituency of District Shikarpur . He further argued that the ECP was obliged to give reasons for it not remaining within the 10% variation. This was not done.
(b) That the delimitation of the constituency should have started from STC Jaggan Taluka as it was the northern end of the District.
(c) That the ECP was obliged not to disturb existing boundaries of administrative units and the delimitation done by ECP does just that i.e. the administrative boundaries of Taluka Shikarpur and Taluka Khanpur were not maintained.
6. The learned counsel for the intervenor , has argued that the intervenor is a voter in the Shikarpur constituency and intends to contest the General Elections, 2018 from the same constituency . Further , he had filed a representation before the ECP after the preliminary delimitation was carried out. He has argued that the final delimitation (as carried out by ECP) conforms to the criteria of geographically , compact areas having similar physical features and also according to law as due care has been taken of the boundaries of administration units as well as commutation. Therefore the impugned order is just and proper .
7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record and maps with their able assistance. Section 20 of the Elections Act, 2017 provides as follows:
20. Principles of delimitation.--- (1) All constituencies for general seats shall, as far is practicable, be delimited having regard to the distribution of population in geographically compact areas, physical features, existing boundaries of administrative units, facilities of communication and public convenience and other cognate factors to ensure homogeneity in the creation of constituencies.
(2) For the purpose of delimiting constituencies for the general seats of the National Assembly for the Tribal Areas two or more separate areas may be grouped into one constituency .
(3) As far as possible, variation in population of constituencies of an Assembly or a local government shall not ordinarily exceed ten percent.
(4) If the limit of ten percent under subsection (3) is exceeded in an exceptional case, the Commission shall record reasons thereof in the delimitation order .
8. As regards the first argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner , we have been informed that after the delimitation as carried out by the ECP, the population of the three provincial assembly constituencies is as follows: P. S.-7 405,491 P. S.-8 420,697 P.S.-9 405,293
9. It is clear from the above figures that the population variation is well within the 10% threshold that must ideally be complied with pursuant to section 20 of the Elections Act, 2017.
10. Rule 10(5) of the Election Rules, 2017 provides as follows: As far as possible, the delimitation of cons tituencies of an Assembly shall start from the Northern end of the district, or, as the case may be, the agency and then proceed clock-wise in zigzag manner keeping in view that population among the constituencies of an Assembly shall remain as close as may be practicable to the quota: Provided that the quota under this sub-rule shall be determined by dividing total population of the district or the agency with number of seats allocated to that district or agency: Provided further that the variation in population between two or more constituencies shall not ordinarily exceed ten percent and the Delimitation Committee shall record reasons if, in exceptional circumstances, the variation has to exceed the limit.
11. It is not denied by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the delimitation for the provincial seats of the District constituency did start from the north of the District, however; we understand that his argument is that it has not begun from the northern most point of the District. The above quoted rule begins with the words "As far as possible...". The law makers took into account that it may not be possible for the ECP to B delimit each constituency by strict adherence to the rule hence it gave the ECP a certain amount of leeway in this regard. One cannot lose sight of the fact that delimiting the country constituencies of the coun try was no simple task and the ECP had to keep in mind the parameters within which the law permitted it to operate. Several factors had to be catered too e.g. compactness, physical features, existing boundaries of administrative units, facilities of communication and public convenience.
We are of the view that in pith and substance, the ECP has complied with the provisions of Rule 10(5) of the Election Rules, 2017.
12. District Shikarpur consists of four talukas and has been assigned three provincial assembly seats. It would- therefore be necessary to tinker with the areas assigned to each taluka to reconcile the area covered for each provincial assembly seat. While the law does provide that boundaries of administrative units should be retained as far as practicable, the only bar in law is contained in Rule 10(4) which provides that in no case shall a Patwar Circle or, as the case may be, a Tapedar Circle be broken under any circumstances. The modifications made by the ECP are within the parameters prescribed by law .
13. No mala fide or ulterior motive on the part of ECP has been shown to us apart from a blanket argument that delimitation has been done "to favour a particular group of candidates." No details of who these candidates are and what interest would ECP have in favouring them has been shown. Unsubstantiat ed and unnecessary allegations have been raised. Contents of the petition also indicate unnecessary exaggeration on the part of the petitioner (for example there is no road network) in a bid to show that the entire delimitation is incorrect and that the ECP should have followed the whims and desires of the petitioner . We further note that due, care has been taken by ECP with regard to the distribution of population in geographically compact areas, physical features, existing boundaries of administrative units, facilities of communication and public convenience and other cognate factors to ensure homogeneity in the creation of constituencies. No violation of the principles enunciated in section 20 of the Act has been committed.
14. In view of the above, we are of the view that the delimitation of District Shikarpur has been carried out within the parameters prescribed by law and the same does not merit interference by this court. The petition therefore stands dismissed.