M. JAVED BUTTAR, J.---This order will dispose of Writ Petitions Nos. 12117, 12118, 12119, 12120, 12653 and 12932 of 2002, as in all these petitions, the delimitation of Constituencies as finalised, pertaining to District Gujrat, having been assailed, common question of law and facts are involved.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Deputy Attorney-General, the representative of the Election Commission and have also seen the record, including the detailed maps produced by the Election Commission as well as by the parties. The learned counsel for the parties addressed arguments at length, on the jurisdiction of this Court to examine the issues involved in the present cases and a number of judgments were cited from both the sides.
Reference can be made to the law laid down in Wasim Sajjad and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others PLD 2001 SC 233. Muhammad Rafiq Tarar v. Justice Ahmed Junejo, Acting Chief Election Commissioner of Pakistan and 6 others PLD 1998 Lahore 461, Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao, President of Pakistan People's Party, N -W.F.P. N, The Governor, N.-W.F.P. And others PLD 1990 Peshawar 192, Pir Sabir Shah v. Federation of Pakistan and others PLD 1994 SC 738 and Messrs Presson Manufacturing Limited and others v. Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources and 2 others 1995 MLD
15. After having gone through the case-law cited before us, we are of the view that this Court in the exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction has the power of judicial review to see the correctness and legality of the delimitations of the constituencies of the National Assembly and the Provincial Assembly, as finalised by the Election Commission, under section 10(3) of the Delimitation of the Constituencies Act (XXXIV of 1974) on the touchstone of the principles of delimitation, as provided in section 9 of the above Act.
3. All these Constitutional petitions pertain to the District Gujrat. The District of Gujrat previously had three constituencies of the National Assembly and seven constituencies of the Provincial Assembly.
The number of the seats, have been increased and at present the district has four National Assembly constituencies and eight Provincial Assembly constituencies. The Election Commission met the requirement of section 10(1) of the Delimitation of Constituencies Act, 1974 by repairing and publishing in the official Gazette, on 26-3-2002, a preliminary report and list of Constituencies specifying the areas proposed to be included in each constituency. The objections to the same were invited and the Election Commission, after hearing and considering the representations and objections, published the final report and the list of the Constituencies, under section 10(3) of the, above Act on 28-6-2002. The petitioners, in all these Constitutional petitions, being aggrieved of the same, have approached this Court for interference. Their grievance in these petitions is against exclusion or inclusion of certain areas from different constituencies.
4. We have perused the orders dated 28-6-2002 passed by the Election Commission of Pakistan (Punjab). The Election Commissioner has made changes in the preliminary report and list of Constituencies published by it on 26-3-2002. We have seen the preliminary report and list and have also seen the final report and list of constituencies. The principles of delimitation, governing the Election Commission, as provided under section 9 of the Delimitation of Constituencies Act, 1974, as far as practicable, have been adhered to by the Election Commission. We have not found any deviation or drastic departure from the guiding principles of the delimitation, provided in the above section, according to which as far as practicable, all constituencies are to be delimited having regard to the distribution of population in geographically compact areas, existing boundaries or administrative units, facilities of communication, public convenience and other cognate factors to ensure homogeneity. The Election Commission, in our opinion, has followed these principles, as far as practicable. Some changes/adjustments, no doubt, have been made.
This was unavoidable due to the increase in the number of seats. We have also kept in view that we are not the Appellate Authority, hearing the appeals from the orders of the Election Commission.
Similarly, it is not for us to substitute our opinion with that of the opinion of the Election Commission.
In Export Promotion Bureau and others v. Qaiser Shafiullah 1994 SCMR 859, it was held by the Supreme Court that:-- "It is well-settled proposition of law that Constitutional jurisdiction is not designed and intended to be used as a substitute for a regular appeal or to be equated with a regular appeal. In a Constitutional petition the High Court cannot interfere with a finding of fact merely on the ground that the reasons which found favour with the Authority whose order is under scrutiny were not such which would have been accepted by the High Court. The Constitutional jurisdiction can be invoked to rectify jurisdictional defects. It is to be pressed into service against an order which is without jurisdiction or tainted with malice or is violative of a provision of the Constitutional/Law and not to correct a finding of fact. "
Suffice it to say that in all these petitions, the guiding principles, referred to above, as far as practicable, have been adhered to, by the Election Commission.
5. In view of the above mentioned, we see no merit in these petitions, which are accordingly dismissed.