MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM-UZ---ZAMAN, J.---Vide order dated 12-9-2002, nomination papers of the appellant namely Imtiaz Ahmad Lali for the Constituency PP 80 Jhang VIII had already been accepted and he had been allowed to contest the forthcoming election. The detailed grounds for passing the above said order are as under.
2. The nomination papers of the appellant were rejected by the learned Returning Officer for the Constituency PP 80 Jhang VIII vide order dated 31-8-2002 on the ground that he was dismissed from service by the order of Senior Superintendent of Police, Faisalabad being an employee of the Police Department so he is disqualified in terms of section 99(1-A)(i) of the Representation of the People Act, 1976.
3. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties at some length and have perused the relevant record minutely.
4. The appellant was Sub-Inspector in Police Department who was proceeded against under the Police (E&D) Rules, 1975 on the charge that he while posted at PRTC left his place of duty without any valid permission by the competent authority and thereafter managed a medical certificate for the period from 16-9-1989 to 15-10-1989. On expiry of said period, he again did not resume duty on the pretext of medical leave whereupon Director Health Services, Faisalabad was asked to constitute a Medical Board for the examination of the appellant but statedly the appellant never bothered to appear before the same on the fixed date. In these circumstances appellant was proceeded against under the said rules. During these proceedings appellant also tendered the resignation but in the light of proceedings pending against him his request was turned down and it was held that the accused/Sub-Inspector is a habitual absentee, incorrigible and was not interested in service and such type of officers do not therein retention in the department, he is therefore dismissed from the service with immediate effect in absentia under the Punjab Police (E&D) Rules, 1975. The dismissal order further reveals that the period the appellant remained absent as well as that of his suspension shall be considered as without pay.
5. Under Article 8D(2)(i) of the Conduct of General Election Order, 2002 a person who has been dismissed from service on the ground of misconduct involving moral turpitude is only debarred from taking part in the forthcoming election and by virtue of Article 3 of ibid Order, the provision of this order shall have effect notwithstanding contained in the Constitution or in any other law for the time being enforced relating to the forthcoming elections of Senate, National Assembly, and Provincial Assembly. In this view of the matter, to disqualify a person on the ground that he being a servant of Provincial Government was dismissed from', service; the essential element to be proved is that his dismissal was on the ground of misconduct involving moral turpitude. In the circumstances of this case as discussed above, the precise allegation against the appellant was that he remained absent from the duty and there is no allegation of moral turpitude of any kind against him. The dismissal order of appellant reveals that he also tendered resignation at one stage but the same was not accepted. This conduct of the appellant clearly shows that he was not interested in police service and voluntarily wanted to quit the job but the same request was turned down and he was forcibly dismissed from the service. Be that as it may, circumstances of this case show that the ingredients of clause (i) of Article 8D(2) of the Conduct of General Election Order, 2002 are not attracted thus the impugned order passed by learned Returning Officer for the Constituency PP 80 Jhang VIII is illegal and the same is set aside. Resultantly, the nomination papers filed by the appellant stand accepted.