The petitioner feels aggrieved of acceptance of nomination papers filed by respondents Nos.2 and 3 to contest elections to the seats of Nazim and Naib-Nazim in Union Council No.108, Kaphoorpur, District Sialkot. The objection raised before the learned Returning Officer was that Muhammad Aslam respondent No.2 had concealed his assets while filing his declaration with his papers, inasmuch as he is running a Lab. in Sialkot. The objection was rejected by the learned Returning Officer on 3-3-2001 observing that only test reports had been filed regarding Punjab Lab.. Sialkot and the candidate has denied the allegation and stated that he is a retired Army official.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends with reference to documents Annexures "D", "E", "F" and "G" to the writ petition that it stands proved that the said respondent is running the said Lab. for gain. The documents Annexures "D" and "E" which are blood test reports contained a legend on top "Punjab Lab". The location is Charag Din Plaza, Circular Road, Sialkot, Phone Nos.598019 and 561204.
Annexure "F" is a bill addressed by Telephone Company to said respondent regarding Phone No.598019 at Shop No.3, Charag Din Plaza, Circular Road, Sialkot.
3. Confronted with the said contention the learned counsel for private respondents states that respondent No.2 was in fact running the Lab. but in January, 2001, he sold away the same and took up agriculture as a means of living.
4. Since I found it difficult to find any nexus between the running a Lab. for biological tests and agriculture, I questioned Muhammad Aslam present in person. He stated that he had been serving in the Army. When asked as to which formation of the Army was he serving in he answered that he had been serving in Army Medical Corp. On further questioning he stated that he had been a Laboratory Technician in several medical institutions being maintained by Army. Further states that after his retirement he set up the said Lab. and had been operating the same. I asked him as to why he had suddenly given up what for all purposes has been a life long career, in January, 2001 and to take up agriculture, he is unable to offer any explanation.
5. In the said state of affairs I do find that the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner as to concealment on the part of the respondents do squarely fall in the disqualification defined in section 14(1) of Punjab Local Government Elections Ordinance, 2000. A copy of declaration form is Annexure "A-I". He has declared yearly income of Rs.5,000 from two acres of land owned by him. He is running a Lab. in the shop located at Circular Road, Sialkot City and what to speak of machinery etc. and other expenses involved in running a Lab. even the rent of the shop is not possible to be paid out of yearly income declared by respondent No.2. The impugned orders accepting the forms of the petitioner when he is possessed of assets that are inconsistent with his declaration and means of income declared therein are declared to be without lawful authority. This writ petition is accordingly allowed. The result would be that the nomination forms filed by respondent No.2 and consequently, respondent No.3 shall stand rejected. No order as to costs.