NA-47: Supreme Court restores PTI candidate as MNA

On May 5, election tribunal had declared victory of PTI's Qaisar Jamal Khan void and ordered fresh elections.


Web Desk May 15, 2014
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf lawmaker Qaisar Jamal Khan. PHOTO: FILE

ISLAMABAD: Just a few days after an election tribunal had declared the victory of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) lawmaker Qaisar Jamal Khan from NA-47 void and ordered fresh elections, the Supreme Court restored Khan as a member of the National Assembly on Thursday, Express News reported.

A two-member bench, headed by Justice Sarmad Jalal Usmani - heard the case today.

Issuing notices to the respondents, the court adjourned the case.

In its short order, tribunal judge Yahya Zahid Gillani on May 5 had set aside the victory of PTI’s Khan on the petition of another candidate Abid Afridi and ordered the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to hold fresh elections.

The frontier regions of Peshawar, Kohat, Bannu, DI Khan, Tank and Lakki Marwat form NA-47.

The order of the tribunal had stated that detailed reasons of the disqualification would be divulged later and through the short order, Afridi’s petition was accepted. Qaisar’s victory was declared void under section 67-D of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1976.

“The notification of ECP dated May 22, 2013 declaring Qaisar the returned candidate for NA-47 is set aside, the seat of the said constituency is declared vacant and ECP is directed to hold fresh elections in the said constituency in accordance with the law,” the order had read.

It had further stated that any aggrieved party may file an appeal at the Supreme Court against the decision within 30 days.

COMMENTS (10)

nyc | 10 years ago | Reply

This is IK's whole point. The tribunals/ROs are completely useless and are rampant with ineffecitve administration and corruption

Kham | 10 years ago | Reply

1 year of fuss = 1 MNA, hahaahha. Entertainment dharna's by IK

VIEW MORE 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