QAZI EHSANULLAH QURESHI, J.---Abidullah petitioner .Has filed this petition with the following prayer:--- "It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the respondents 1may graciously be directed to register the name of the petitioner in 'the electoral roll of village Mayyar and his nomination paper be accepted for the post of Nazim Union Council village Mayyar District Mardan."
2. The petitioner filed his nomination papers for the seat of Nazim Union Council Village Mayyar District Mardan before the Returning Officer (respondent No.5) which were rejected by the Returning Officer vide his order, dated 3-3-2001 on the ground that the name of the petitioner was not entered/registered in the electoral list having not satisfied by the said order the petitioner preferred an appeal before respondent No.6 (District Returning Officer) who by his order, dated 9- 3-2001 dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and maintained the order, dated 3-3-2001 passed by Returning Officer. Hence the present petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner; inter alia, contended that in the previous voters list the name of the petitioner was recorded as a voter but in the present electoral roll his name was omitted, as such he has submitted an application before respondent No. l in order to enrol his name as a voter. The respondent No. l then forwarded the application to respondent No.3 for enquiry. The enquiry to this effect was conducted and report was submitted with favourable remarks to respondent No. l that the petitioner is the bona fide resident of the concerned constituency and he is qualified for enrolment in the relevant electoral roll. But the Returning - Officer and District Returning Officer did not take into account the important fact crucial in the matter.
4. We have examined the record in view of contention of learned counsel for the petitioner which we afraid are not in consonance with the provision of Election Ordinance, 2000 and Rules, 2000 and appears to be totally misconceived in the case in hand. Let us, however, look at the relevant provision for guidance sake:--- S.14.Qualification for candidates and elected members.
A person shall qualify to be elected or to hold an elective office or membership of a Local Government, if he:--- (a). Is a citizen of Pakistan;
(b) is at least twenty five years of age;
(c) is enrolled as a voter in the electoral roll of the relevant ward: Section 14 sub-clause (C) explicitly provides that the person shall qualify to be elected or to hold an elective office or membership of a Local Government, if he is enrolled as a voter in the electoral roll of the relevant ward. The rule 16 sub-clause (2) enshrined that any elector of an electoral ward may propose or second the name of any duly qualified person to be a candidate for becoming a member for that ward.
5. Plain reading of section 14(c) read with section 16(2) of Election Rules, 2000 leaves no place for any doubt that candidate contesting for an election of any ward must be enrolled as a voter in the electoral roll of the relevant ward and in case he is not a voter of the ward concerned, he is not qualified person to be candidate as per rule 16(2). In such eventuality his nomination paper may follow penal consequences under rule 18 sub-clause 3(iii) which read as under:--- "The Returning Officer, may, either suo motu or upon any objection, conduct such summary enquiry as he may think fit and reject a nomination paper if he is satisfied that.
(iii) Any provision of rule 16 or rule 17 has not been complied with. "
6. As far as the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Election Commissioner approved his case for enrolment as a voter in the relevant ward after filing of nomination paper is concerned, is not a valid and legal proposition for acceptance of his nomination paper, rules provide that the candidate shall be a voter and qualified person on the date of filing of the nomination paper. As given in section 14(c) (ibid). There is no discretionary provision provided therein that even after filing of nomination paper if he is enrolled as a voter, he will be qualified person to contest election Before the announcement of election schedule, proposed draft voter list is placed at accessible and conspicuous place for inspection of the inhabitant of the area and fix target date is given for inviting objections for correction of name, parentage, omission of name if any not recorded in the list or deletion of person, enrolled not qualified to be enrolled in that ward/Union Council.
7. After the target date the list is printed, final list is declared and the election schedule is announced thereupon, no person is allowed to be enrolled as a voter later than the due time prescribed by the election Commission and the omission and commission if any on the part of the Election Commission cannot be rectified subsequently. In any case a person whose registration of vote is omitted in the final list and he failed to apply within the given time despite vast publicity through Pakistan Television, Radio and National Daily/Weekly New prints. He cannot be considered voter for the current election.
8. The set principles of Election are that no sooner election schedule/notification is declared, complete process in respect of recording of votes/rectification of list is to be stopped forthwith in order to streamline the election, in a disciplined and smooth manner and to concentrate further in the election sequence i.e. Poling etc. In case the voter re-enlistment is allowed it will be amounting to revert back to day one and to struck up the whole process rather to guillotine the complete hectic excise which is already culminated after due long process.
9.In wake of the above, conclusion can be drawn that the petitioner was not a qualified person to be a candidate in the election under the rules referred to above. So, the plea of the petitioner that the Election Commission has approved his name for enrolment as a voter after the filing of his nomination paper and calling upon election schedule, holds no water under the law being not a voter at the right time as such nay subsequent entry does not confer any right upon the petitioner and be given effect retrospectively to become a qualified candidate.
Resultantly, we by upholding the decision of the Returning Officer and District Returning Officer, Mardan, we decline to interfere with the same: The writ petition is accordingly dismissed in limine alongwith C.M. No. 370 of 2001.