|
SC adjourns hearing of petitions of Shahban Mirani, others
By Khalid Amin
ISLAMABAD—A five-member bench of the Supreme Court Monday adjourned the
hearing of four identical election petitions filed by Mir Aftab Shahban
Mirani, Lt. Gen. (Retd) Salahuddin Tirmazi, Mir Ahmed Khoso and Agha
Arslan.
During the proceedings the petitioners’ counsels could not complete
their arguments over the issue of jurisdiction of the Islamabad High
Court and the Election Commission of Pakistan. The bench comprising
Justice Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Justice Zia Pervez, Justice Hamid Farooq,
Justice Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud and Justice Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery
heard the case and adjourned the hearing for Tuesday.
Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa, Dr.Babar Awan
and other advocates appeared before the court representing the
petitioners and the respondents. Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, Hafiz S. A Rehman
represented the respondents separately. Attorney General Malik Muhammad
Qayyum also appeared on notice.
Mir Aftab Shahban Mirani, a candidate of Pakistan Peoples Party from NA.
202 Shikarpur has filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the
order of the Sindh High Court against holding of re-polling at 16
polling stations as ordered by the Election Commission.
The Sindh High Court accepting the election petition of Muhammad Ibrahim,
a candidate of National Peoples Party from the same constituency set
aside order of the Election Commission for holding re-polling at 16
stations. Sardar Latif Khan Khosa represented Mir Aftab Shahban Mirani.
Abdul Hafeez Pirzada representing the respondent Muhammad Ibrahim said
that the Election Commission had no jurisdiction to pass orders for the
re-polling after the announcement of result.
In the case of Mr. Tirmazi, the Election Commission has already issued
result notification of Sardar Shahjehan Yousaf as winner from NA. 20
Mansehra after the vacation of stay order by the Supreme Court earlier
granted by the apex court. Lt. General (Retd) Salahuddin Tirmazi filed
an election petition in the Supreme Court after the decision of Peshawar
High Court, especially raising points about the jurisdiction of the
Islamabad High Court. |