ORDER ljaz-ul-Ahsan, J.--This single order shall decide Civil Petition No.2752 2018 and Civil Petition No.2753 of 2018, as the same involving common questions of law and fact arise out of a common judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 05.07.2018.
2. The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 05.07.2018.
Through the impugned judgment, constitutional petitions (WP. No. 223481 of 2018 and W.P. No. 223315 of 2018) filed by the Respondents were allowed and nomination papers of the petitioner were rejected.
3. Brief facts necessary for decision of the lis at hand are that the petitioner filed his nomination papers to contest elections from NA-146, Arifwala, District Pakpattan Sharif. The Respondents filed objections on the ground that the petitioner is not qualified to contest the elections or to hold public office because he had made a misstatement in the affidavit regarding his educational qualifications. The Returning Officer vide order dated 14.06.2018 rejected the objections and accepted the nomination papers of the petitioner .
4. Being aggrieved of the said order , the Respondents filed an election appeal which met the same fate. They , therefore, approached the learned High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction. The writ petition was allowed and the nomination papers of the petitioner were rejected. Hence, these petitions.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no declaration against the petitioner by a Court of competent jurisdiction. In the absence of such declaration, the petitioner could not have been disqualified to 'be a member of the Parliament. He maintains that the petitioner has twice been elected as member of the Parliament and is victim of protracted litigation at the hands of the Respondents and others. He further submits that the finding of misstatement/mis-declaration in the affidavit against the petitioner by the learned High Court in a summary procedure and rejection of nomination papers on this score was beyond the jurisdiction of the High Court. He finally submits that the learned High Court while rejecting the nomination papers of the petitioner misconstrued the facts pertaining to his educational qualification and wrongly concluded that he had made false statement/declaration on Oath in the nomination papers.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and examined the record. It appears from the record that the petitioner claimed to be a Graduate of Punjab University having graduated in 2002 and subsequently from University of Balochistan having, for some reason, graduated again in 2006. In his affidavit appended with his nomination papers, with regard to his educational qualification, he wrote the following: "Educated (BA matter subjudice before Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No.52863 of 2017 and Writ Petition No. 182760 of 2018)."
7. We notice that the nomination papers for NA-166, Pakpattan-II submitted on 24.08.2002 revealed that he was a graduate. Likewise, the nomination papers of the petitioner for the same constituency filed on 26.11.2007 also reflected the same qualification. It is clear from the record that degree issued by the Punjab University showing the said qualification of the petitioner was cancelled. The Higher Education Commission also got the credentials of the result intimation card of Rana Zahid Hussain checked from the University of Balochistan. The said University , vide its letter dated 18.04.2018 stated as follows: "The Assistant Registrar (Registration/ Migration) has informed this office vide Letter No.4-Reg/18, dated 05.04.2018 that according to University record the Registration No.2002/UB-2006/A-94103 mentioned in the B.A.
Transcript of studies of Rana Zahid Hussain son of Rana Muhammad Sharif Khan was actually allotted to Aurangzaib Magsi son of Muhammad Akram Magsi. He further stated that now he has received the education documents of Rana Zahid Hussain son of Rana Muhammad Sharif Khan whereby it is observed that the candidate concerned has passed its F.A. in Supplementary examination 2004, hence having no gap of two years, he was not eligible to appear in B.A. (A) examination 2006 (copy attached at Flag-"A".
In view of above narrated facts, the B.A. result of the candidate concerned has been withheld and cannot be verify as authentic."
8. From the facts narrated above, it is established that the Punjab University has cancelled the result of the petitioner which act of cancellation appea rs to be under challenge before the Lahore High Court. There is nothing on record to indicate that the order of cancellation has either been set aside or suspended. This essentially means that cancellation of the petitioner's degree issued by the Punjab University still holds the field.
9. Likewise, as far as the degree issued by the University of Balochistan is concerned, we find that the said University has confirmed that according to the University record the Registration No. 2002/UB-2006/A/94103 mentioned in the BA transcript of studies of the petitioner was actually allotted to one Aurangzeb Magsi S/o Muhammad Akram Magsi. The said fact has not been contested by the petitioner . However , even if it was to be believed that the petitioner had passed his FA examination, the same had been done in Supplementary Examination, 2005 and there was no chance of the petitioner having qualified his BA examination on account of absence of a gap of two years between the FA examination and BA examination. Even on that account, the claim of the petitioner of being a graduate is ex facie false and incorrect. No convincing material has been placed on record to show that the findings of the University of Balochistan have been challenged before any forum.
10. In view of adequate material available on record indicating that educational testimonials relied upon by the petitioner were fake, fabricated and false, the assertion of the petitioner in his nomination papers that he was BA and the matter was sub judice before the learned High Court smacks of an attempt to cover up his acts by relying on technicalities and justifying false statement made by him in his nomination papers in the earlier elections.
11. Further , on ac-count of the aforenoted reasons, we find that the petitioner has clearly made a false statement regarding his educational qualifications in the nomination papers. He has willfully suppressed material facts and knowingly made mis-declarations in his nomination papers showing himself as a graduate which claim is not supported by the record. We are, therefore, not inclined to interfere in the order of the High Court which is well reasoned, based upon material on recor d and proceeds on correct application and interpretation of the relevant provisions of law .
12. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to persuade us to conclude that the order of the learned High Court suffers from any legal, procedural or jurisdictional error, defect or flaw that may require interference by this Court in exercise of powers under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic Pakistan, 1973.
13. For reasons recorded above, these petitions fail. The same are accordingly dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.