Redrawn boundaries: Court calls for comments from ECP on MQM plea

MQM said the SLGA 2013 is a violation of the Constitution.


Our Correspondent December 05, 2013
MQM said the SLGA 2013 is a violation of the Constitution. PHOTO: EXPRESS/FILE

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) directed the relevant authorities on Thursday to file their replies on the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) plea against delimitation.

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, who headed the bench, issued notices to the Election Commission of Pakistan, provincial chief secretary, local government secretary, provincial census commissioner, Karachi commissioner and the deputy commissioners of Malir, West, East, Central and South districts for December 19 when the matter will be taken up.

The MQM had challenged the delimitation process on the basis of the creation of new union committees in the city ahead of the local government elections. The MQM approached the high court through its deputy convener Dr Farooq Sattar.

Sattar said the Sindh chief secretary has illegally and without any jurisdiction legislated over the Sindh Local Government Act (SLGA) 2013 and violated Article 140-A of the Constitution. Section-3 of the act clearly says that the population count shall be in accordance with the last preceding officially published census. The last census was held in 1998, he pointed out.

His lawyer, Barrister Farogh Naseem, submitted that the SLGA 2013 was amended through the Sindh Local Government (Amendment) Act 2013 on November 2. In terms of section-27 of the said amendment, it is clearly provided that the population of union committees was to fall between 10,000 and 15,000. Similarly, the population of the union committees in the metropolitan corporation is between 40,000 and 50,000. “The said notification is illegal and against the SLGA 2013 as there is nothing in the statute which permits such a notification.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 6th, 2013.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

E-Publications

Most Read