IN THE HONORABLE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

CP No.D-5244/2022

Liaqat Ali Askani……………………………………………………………………Petitioner.

Versus

Federation of Pakistan & Others……………………………………….Respondents.

PARAWISE COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT NO.1, 2 & 3

PRELIMINARY LEGAL OBJECTIONS

1. That the Election Commission (answering respondent) is an

independent Constitutional body constituted under Article 218 (2) of
the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan and charged with the
duty to organize and conduct the election and to make such
arrangements as are necessary to ensure that the election is to be
conduct honestly, justly, fairly in accordance with law, and corrupt
practices are guarded against under Article 218 (3) of the Constitution.
The importance of constitutional and statutory role of the Election
Commission has elaborately been discussed in a landmark case of
Workers Party‘s case reported as PLD 2012 Supreme Court 681.

2. It is submitted that under Article 222(b) of the Constitution of Islamic

Republic of Pakistan, it is constitutional obligation of the Election
Commission to delimit the constituencies which is foundational step
towards holding elections in a free, fair and honest manner as
stipulated under Article 218(3) of the Constitution.
3. The delimitation of constituencies is based not only on the geographical
situation but also on the basis of population and it is the function of
Election Commission to determine the same and the Hon’ble High
Court under Article 199 of the Constitution cannot adjudicate upon the
factual controversy. Reliance in this regard is placed on PLD 2003 Lah
 125 “Shahbaz Khan vs. Election Commission of Pakistan”. Moreover,
the reliance is placed on Order dated.06.09.2022 passed by the
Honorable Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No.51693 of
2022 “Title Muhammad Ashfaq Versus Election Commission of Pakistan
ect.

4. That the answering respondent in the performance and exercise of its

duties under Article 218(3) and 222(b) of the Constitution and Section
20 of the Elections Act, 2017 and all other enabling provisions has
carried out delimitation in a transparent manner.

5. Delimitation of constituencies is one of the foundational and important

steps to organize and conduct fair and transparent election. Equal
population is not practically possible and in order to meet exigencies
and emergent situations, the legislature has provided some permissible
limits and variation in population subject to the recording of reasons by
the Commission.

6. That it is the fundamental right of every citizen of Pakistan to contest

election but to contest the same on basis of delimitation at one’s own
aspiration is not a fundamental right.

7. That no one could claim vested right that his/her representation to the
Commission be accepted nor any person could carve out/delimit a
constituency according to his/her desires.

PARAWISE REPLY

1. That the contents of Para No.1 need no comments.

2. That the contents of Para No.2 are admitted up to the extent the
petitioner is the member of Provincial Assembly Sindh.

3. That the contents of Para No.3 are not admitted. It is submitted that
the Mauripur sub-division has not sufficient population to create a
single constituency. It has the population of 192,565 only, whereas, the
 population required for creation of one Provincial Assembly seats in
Keamari District is 365,967. Therefore, one constituency cannot be
created from one sub-division only. Furthermore, the District Keamari
comprises on 2 National Assembly Seats and 5 Provincial Assembly
Seats. There are only four sub-Divisions in District Keamari. Therefore,
the delimitation of 5 Provincial Constituencies has been made out of
four sub-divisions. Further, the delimitation committee started
delimitation from the northern end and proceeded clockwise as per
Rule 10. The adjacent areas have been included in PS 112 while keeping
geographical compactness in view and also to avoid gerrymandering.

4. That the contents of Para No.4 are not admitted. It is submitted that
the delimitation has been carried out keeping in view the principles laid
down under the Section 20 of the Elections Act, 2017 and Rule 10 of
the Elections Rules 2017.
5. That the contents of Para No.5 are not admitted that the delimitation
has been carried out while keeping in view the interests of general
public. Therefore, the adjacent areas have been included in the same
PS.

6. That the contents of Para No.6 are admitted up-to the extent that NA-
243 Keamari II comprises the areas as mentioned below;

Sr.No Name of Constituency Name of Area/Sub-

Division
1 Keamari Sub-Division
2 NA-243, Keamari-II Mauripur Sub-Division
3 Census Charges 3 and 4
of Site Sub-Division

7. That the contents of Para No.7 are not admitted. It is submitted that
the Election Commission of Pakistan is an independent Constitutional
body and is mandated under Section 17 of the Elections Act, 2017 to
delimit constituencies when fresh census is officially published. As a
result, the commission delimited the constituencies as per lawunderthe
 principles of delimitation as enshrined in section 20 of the Election Act,
2017 and Rule 10 of the Election Rules 2017. Further, it is not necessary
for the commission to keep same delimitation for an indefinite period.
Furthermore, the Delimitation.Committee has not created two sub-
divisions out of one. Creation of sub-Division rests with executive and
not with the Election Commission. It has just delimited the
constituencies from the existing sub-divisions.

8. That the contents of Para No.8 are not admitted. It is submitted that
Sub rule 04 of Rule 10 of Election Rules 2017 empowers the
Delimitation Committee is appended as under:

‘(4) The consistency for an Assembly shall not ordinarily extend

to more than one district except in exceptional circumstances
for reasons to be recorded by the Delimitation
Committee:Provided that a Patwar Circle or, as the case may be,
a Tapedar Circle shall be the basic unit for delimitation and it
shall not be broken under any circumstances:
Provided further that in case of urban areas census circle shall
not be broken under any circumstances.”

It is not mandatory that the Commission cannot break sub-division to

create one PS/Constituency. Sub-Divisions can be divided to meet out
the population criteria for delimiting the constituency by merging areas
of different sub-division. The Commission doesn’t break Census
Circle/Tapedar Circle in ordinary circumstances, which in the instant
case has not broken any Tapedar Circle or census circle. (Rule 10 sub
rule 04 as referred above).
9. That the contents of Para No.9 are not admitted. It is submitted that
the Karachi is an urban city having no tribal culture, hence, this fact is
completely denied as the possibility of tribal clash cannot arise at all.

10. That the contents of Para No.10 are not admitted. It is submitted that
the public does not need to travel to far flung areas for the redessal of
their grievances and other issues, but Public simply vote to candidate of
their choice at the nearest polling station created for them. It is the
normal practice prevalent in ECP that no polling station is established
beyond 2 Kilometer Distance.

11. That the contents of Para No.11 are admitted up-to the extent that the
petitioner filed objections before the Election Commission against the
preliminary delimitation of constituencies. The same were rejected on
merit and on the grounds as mentioned below;

i. Total population of District is 1829837.

ii. The average/mean population of a provincial

Constituency of District Keamari is 365967. The upper and
lower permissible limit of population is 384266 and
347669 respectively.

iii. That the proposal of petitioner for the delimitation of PS

112, Keamari-I was 384591, whereas the permissible
upper limit is 384266.Therefore, there was an increase of
325 in population. The objector failed to provide concrete
reason in this regard. Furthermore, his proposal starts
from Mauripur sub-division and instead of moving
clockwise to Baldia Sub-Division, it moved anti-clockwise
and included areas of Keamari sub-division. This violates
the Rule 10 of the Election Rules 2017. Besides that the
proposal of petitioner of PS-112 Keamari-I includes four
census circles of Charge 1 of Keamari Sub-Division which
 comes in between PS-115 Keamari IV and PS 116 Keamari
V, therefore, there is no contiguity in it.

iv. That the proposal ofpetitioner for the delimitation of PS

114, Keamari-III contained the population 317451.
Whereas the permissible lower limit is 347669.
Variation/decrease of 30218 had not been accounted for.
It is against the basic legal injunctions.

v. That the proposal of PS 115, Keamari-IV contains the

population 403574. Whereas the permissible upper limit
is 384266. Variation/increase of 19308 has not been
accounted for. As at Para 11 above.

12. That the contents of Para No.12 need no comments.

13. That the contents of Para No.13 need no comments

14. That the contents of Para No.14 need no comments

15. That the contents of Para No.15 need no comments

16. That the contents of Para No.16 need no comments

PRAYER

It is submitted that the petitioner’s proposal lacks merit and devoid of

meritocracy. He just wants to pack constituency for himself at the cost of
cracking constituencies for others. The Delimitation has been carried out in
keeping view the principles of Delimitation as laid down in Section 20 of
the Elections Act, 2017. The petitioner has failed to point out any specific
violation of principle, rather, discussed the principles in general. It is,
therefore, humbly submitted and prayed that the petitioner’s proposal is
baseless, groundless and no legal foundation. It is requested that the
petition may kindly be dismissed on the grounds mentioned supra. The
other order as may deem appropriate by the Hon’ble Court, please.