Senate elections: tribunal dismisses Pervaiz Rasheed appeal

LAHORE: An appellate election tribunal of the Lahore High Court (LHC) on Tuesday dismissed an appeal filed by Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Pervaiz Rasheed against rejection of his nomination papers for the Senate elections by the returning officer.

The tribunal comprising Justice Shahid Waheed heard the appeal wherein the PML-N leader along with his counsel appeared.

At start of the proceedings, a law officer apprised the tribunal that record of Punjab House, Islamabad, and the Election Commission had come, in response to a query.

At this stage, Punjab House controller submitted record about stay of Pervaiz Rasheed in Punjab House and audited report. He further submitted that a notice had been sent to Pervaiz Rasheed for payment of Rs 9.5 million dues at his DHA residence.

However, Pervaiz Rasheed's counsel denied service of any notice for payment of dues of Punjab House. He argued that a notice had been given to his client during scrutiny of nomination papers and he attempted to deposit the amount but it was not received. He submitted that even now Pervaiz Rasheed was ready to pay the dues , adding that he gave application twice to the returning officer for payment of dues but to no avail.

The counsel submitted that record of Punjab House had come and the tribunal could confirm that Pervaiz Rasheed did not stay at Punjab House.

At this, Justice Shahid Waheed observed that Pervaiz Rasheed had not claimed in his appeal that he did not stay at Punjab House.

To which, the counsel submitted that Pervaiz Rasheed had contested Senate election earlier but the objection of non-payment of dues was not raised at that time. He pleaded with court to allow his client to contest the elections while concluding his arguments.

A counsel on behalf of the respondent objector claimed that Pervaiz Rasheed was aware of the government dues but he did nothing for the purpose. If Pervaiz Rasheed never stayed at Punjab House then why he was ready to pay the dues, he questioned.

He submitted that the returning officer gave Pervaiz Rasheed 48 hours for payment of the dues but the amount was not deposited.

At this stage, Justice Shahid Waheed questioned the counsel where Perviaz Rasheed was supposed to deposit the dues.

The counsel stated that Pervaiz Rasheed should have deposited the dues to controller Punjab House.

The Punjab House controller clarified that Pervaiz Rasheed did not approach him or any other staff member for the purpose.

The respondent counsel further submitted that the Supreme Court had already observed that Pervaiz Rasheed unlawfully appointed Ata ul Haq Qasmi.

To which, Justice Shahid Waheed questioned whether he wanted to raise a new objection.

The counsel replied that it was an important issue, questioning how Ata Ul Haq Qasmi was appointed on such a big position.

The Advocate general Punjab also submitted during the hearing that Pervaiz Rasheed had not claimed in his appeal that he never took room at Punjab House Islamabad. He submitted that verdict had come about Pervaiz Rasheed in Ata ul Haq Qasmi case.

To this, Pervaiz Rasheed's counsel argued that the Ata ul Haq Qasmi issue did not come under discussion before the returning officer whereas Pervaiz Rasheed had filed a reply with the court concerned in the case.

Subsequently, the tribunal, after hearing arguments of parties, dismissed the appeal filed by Pervaiz Rasheed and upheld the decision of the returning officer.

It is worth mentioning here that a returning office had last week rejected the nomination papers of Pervaiz Rasheed for Senate elections over being a Rs 9.5 million defaulter of Punjab House Islamabad. A PTI MPA had challenged the nomination papers of Pervaiz Rasheed.