In the Hon’ble Islamabad High Court of Islamabad

Writ Petition No.3131/2022

Shafique vs Election Commissioner of Pakistan and others

Parawise Comments on behalf of Respondent No,1 in the writ petition under

Article 199 of the constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan
1. Admitted to the extent that Election Commission of Pakistan published final list of
constituencies on the 5th August, 2022.
2. Admitted that Election Commission of Pakistan published preliminary list of
constituencies on the 31st May, 2022. The voters were given opportunity to file
objection as per sub-Section 3 of Section 21 of the Elections Act-2017. The
petitioner also filed objection.
3. Delimitation Committee followed principles of Delimitation mentioned in Section 20
of the Elections Act-2017. Election Commission of Pakistan heard objections on
preliminary delimitation. The Election Commission of Pakistan heard petitioner
through counsel in detail including perusing preliminary Maps, proposal map of the
petitioner and revenue record but did not find any violation of principles of
delimitation mentioned in Section 20 of the Election Act-2017 and Sub-Rule 5 pf
Rule 10 of the Elections Rules-2017. Hence, the proposal of petitioner was
dismissed.
4. The reply of para is given in para-3.
5. The Sub-Rule-5 of Rule 10 of the Elections Rules-2017 has fully been followed in
letter and spirit. The Delimitation of Constituencies was started from the northern
end and proceeded in clock wise in keeping view the population criteria. It is further
submitted that the Map of District Larkana is in Vertical Shape despite that
delimitation was started from the northern end of the map.
6. The Delimitation Committee followed Rule 10(5) of the Elections Rules-2017. The
petitioner only pick and choose areas as the petitioner has no any PS-10 Larkana-I.
Delimitation Committee had to proceeded clockwise by delimiting the adjoining
areas in keeping view the population criteria. On the ending point PS-10 Larkana-I,
delimitation of PS-11 Larkana-II was started instead of pick and choose policy. The
petitioner’s proposal is based on pick and choose policy. The Election Commission
of Pakistan also issued speaking order on the objection of the petitioner.
7. The Delimitation considered all principles of Delimitation such as population,
physical features, cognate factors etc. By following Rule 10(5) of the Elections
Rules—2017, it is naturally to delimit Municipal Corporation in a separate PS. Only
Census Charge No.10 & 11 were excluded due to crossing of population limit. The
remaining Census Charges No.10 & 11 were included in PS-12 Larkana-III. There is
easy access of crossing of the public from canal. Canal passes through the city and
it is irrational to bifurcate an urban area despite the public have an easy access of
crossing. Bifurcation of urban people might have led to cracking of urban area and
they would have been changed in minority.
8. The reply of para is already given in para-7
9. The average population of Provincial Assembly seat of District Larkana is 380,447
and upper limit is 399,469 and lower limit is 361424. Population of PS-12 Larkana-III
is 399,940 which is only 471 is higher than the upper limit. As per provisio of Sub-
Rule 4 of Rule 10 of the Elections Rules 2017, Delimitation Committee shal not
break any Tapedar Circle in rural area and Census Circle in urban area. Therefore,
only meagre population of 471 crossed the upper limit and Delimitation Committee
also recorded reasons during publication of report of preliminary delimitation.
10. The reply of this para has already been given in para-7 and Para-9.
Grounds:
A). Election Commission of Pakistan issued speaking order and objections of the
petitioner were listened in detail through perusing maps and other revenue record. The
proposal of petitioner was also studied in detail but the Election Commission of
Pakistan did not find any violation of principles of delimitation in Preliminary Delimitation
of Constituencies of District Larkana.
B) The reply of this para has already been given in para-A
C) The Delimitation considered all principles of Delimitation such as population,
physical features, cognate factors etc. By following Rule 10(5) of the Elections Rules—
2017, it is naturally to delimit Municipal Corporation in a separate PS. Only Census
Charge No.10 & 11 were excluded due to crossing of population limit. The remaining
Census Charges No.10 & 11 were included in PS-12 Larkana-III. There is easy access
of crossing of the public from canal. Canal passes through the city and it is irrational to
bifurcate an urban area despite the public have an easy access of crossing. Bifurcation
of urban people might have led to cracking of urban area and they would have been
changed in minority. Delimitation Committee followed Section 20 of the Elections Act-
2017 and Rule 10 (5) of the Elections Rules 2017 in letter and spirit.
D) The reply of this para has already been given in para-C and para-7.
E) The proposal of petitioner bifurcates Urban area and chooses selective areas to
change urban majority into urban minority. The public has an easy access to cross Rice
Canal without any difficulty and Rice Canal has many crossings for traffic as well as for
the public without any hindrance.
F) The reply of para is already given in para-9
G) The reply of para is already given in para-9
H) The reply of para is already given in para-C and para-7
I) The proposal of petitioner violates principles of delimitation of cognate factors
and Rule 10(5) of the Elections Rules-2017.
J) The reply of para is already given para-I
K) Delimitation Committee followed principles of Delimitation in letter and spirit. The
proposal of petitioner is another shape of packing and cracking of areas which is
violation of delimitation.
L) Need no comments from the Respondent No.1
M) Need no comments from the Respondent No.1

Prayer:
It is submitted that the petitioner’s proposal lacks any cogent reason. The
Delimitation has been carried out in keeping view the principles of Delimitation.
The petitioner fails to point out any violation of principle but he has discussed the
principles in general. The petitioner’s proposal does not follow the principles of
Delimitation mentioned in Section 20 of the Election Act-2017 and Election Rules
2017 and his proposal also cracks urban area and changes urban area into
minority. It is, therefore, prayed that the petitioner’s proposal is devoid of any
legality and requested to dismiss the petition or other benefits as may deem
appropriate.