IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
Present: 
Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, CJ 
Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed 
Mr. Justice Sh. Azmat Saeed 
 
Civil Petition No.756-L of 2013 
[On 
appeal 
against 
the 
order 
dated 
25.04.2013, passed by the Lahore High 
Court, Lahore, in W.P.No.9513 of 2013] 
 
 
Khalid Pervaiz Gill 
Petitioner(s) 
VERSUS 
Saifullah Gill & others 
Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s) 
: Mr. M. Ahsan Bhoon, ASC 
 
  
For Respondent No.1 
: Sheikh Muhammad Suleman, ASC 
Mr. Arshad Ali Ch., AOR 
 
  
Date of Hearing 
: 10.05.2013 
 
ORDER 
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, CJ.—This petition has 
been filed for leave to appeal against the impugned order dated 
25.04.2013. 
2. 
 
Precisely stating the facts of the case are that the 
petitioner being a candidate in the forthcoming elections from  
PP-61, Faisalabad, objected to the candidature of the respondent 
from the same constituency before the Returning Officer (RO) 
contending that he being a candidate for the seat of Nazim of 
Union Council 134 (held in the year 2005) produced a fake and 
forged matriculation certificate showing his date of birth to 
C.P.No.756-L of 2013 
- 2 - 
 
02.04.1979 instead of 02.08.1981, on this a case was registered 
against him thus he is not entitled to contest the election, as he 
did not fulfil the conditions laid down in Article 62 of the 
Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.  The 
objection was contested by the respondent. The RO on having 
taken into consideration the objection observed “the candidate 
has not categorically denied in his written reply that he has not 
mentioned his date of birth in his matriculation certificate as 
02.04.1979 while filing his nomination papers for contesting the 
election of Nazim Union Council No.134.  A copy of the certificate 
has been appended with the objection petition showing that birth 
entry has forged by the candidate as 02.04.1979 to make himself 
eligible to contest the election for the seat of Nazim Union Council 
was a person who has dishonestly forged an entry and made 
himself eligible to contest the particular election cannot be terms 
as Sadiq and Amin so his nomination paper is hit by provision of 
Article 62 of the Constitution”.  Accordingly his nomination papers 
were rejected. 
3. 
 
At this juncture, it would not be out of context to 
mention that according to Section 152 of the Punjab Local 
Government Ordinance, 2001, a person who is at least 25 years 
of age besides fulfilling other conditions was qualified to contest 
the election.  It seems that the respondent was not of 25 years of 
age as his date of birth has been shown to be 02.08.1981 in the 
C.P.No.756-L of 2013 
- 3 - 
 
matriculation certificate but somehow he managed to produce a 
matriculation certificate with the date of birth as 02.04.1979.   
4. 
 
The respondent preferred an appeal before the Election 
Tribunal, which has been allowed on 13.04.2013, against which 
the petitioner preferred a Constitution Petition before a larger 
Bench of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, which has not been 
disposed of on merits for the reasons mentioned in the impugned 
order, para 2 therefrom is reproduced herein below:- 
“2. 
We have heard the learned counsel for the 
parties.  We have already held in other matters that 
the cases of objectors in which similar questions 
have been agitated, need to be disposed of leaving 
the petitioner to agitate the matter before the 
Election Commission of Pakistan under the provisions 
of Representation of People Act, 1976 or other 
appropriate proceedings should the Respondent be 
returned.  In other petitions filed by objectors the 
following order has been passed. 
“We have been informed by the Election 
Commission of Pakistan (ECP) that final list of 
validly nominated contesting candidates has 
been prepared, which would be followed by 
printing of ballot papers, which contains the 
names 
of 
validly 
nominated 
contesting 
candidates alongwith their election symbols.  
Any interference in this process including, but 
not limited to addition or omission of names of 
candidates is likely to affect the election 
schedule framed by the ECP.  Further, the 
petitioner has a remedy to approach the ECP 
under Representation of People Act, 1976 or 
avail his remedy under the law after the 
elections, if so advised.  Therefore, in the 
C.P.No.756-L of 2013 
- 4 - 
 
interest of justice, equity, fair play and in order 
to ensure that the elections are held as per 
Schedule, we are not inclined to interfere in 
the 
impugned 
order 
dated 
16.04.2013.  
Consequently, this petition is disposed of”. 
 
5. 
 
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in 
view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned High 
Court may have not refused to exercise jurisdiction under Article 
199 of the Constitution, as there is a conclusive findings against 
the respondent that he has forged his date of birth in the 
matriculation certificate in order to make himself eligible to 
contest the election of Union Council and had shown his date of 
birth to be 02.04.1979 instead of 02.08.1981, as it was so held 
by the Election Tribunal constituted under the Punjab Local 
Government Ordinance, 2001, vide order dated 22.05.2007 copy 
of which is also available on record, passed in Election Petition 
No.29-E of 2005.  He further stated that against these findings, a 
Writ Petition No.6266/2007 was presented before the High Court, 
which was subsequently withdrawn on 04.09.2007.  It would be 
appropriate to reproduce herein below the order of withdrawal:- 
 
“Learned 
counsel 
for 
the 
petitioners 
under 
instructions, 
prayed 
for 
withdrawal 
of 
instant 
petition.  Dismissed as withdrawn”. 
 
6. 
 
He further contended that the respondent had also 
suffered criminal proceedings on account of committing forgery 
but ultimately in terms of compromise he was acquitted of the 
C.P.No.756-L of 2013 
- 5 - 
 
charge, however, conclusive findings of fact as mentioned above 
are operating against him that he had tampered the age in the 
matriculation certificate in order to make himself qualified to 
contest the election of local bodies in terms of Section 52 of the 
Local Government Ordinance, 2001, therefore, according to him 
and in view of the said declaration by a Court of law/Tribunal 
after recording evidence,  the respondent’s case is fully covered 
under Article 62 (1)(f) of the Constitution, therefore, he may be 
disqualified. 
7. 
 
The learned counsel for the Caveat vehemently 
opposed the contention put forward on behalf of the petitioner 
and stated that this Court from time to time had observed in a 
number of cases that date of birth mentioned in a matriculation 
certificate cannot be considered conclusive against a candidate.  
Reliance in this behalf has been placed on the case of Waqas 
Akram v. Dr. Muhammad Tahirul Qadri & others (2003 SCMR 
145) as well as on the case of Muhammad Safdar Abbasi v. Aamir 
Yar Malik & 3 others (2004 SCMR 1602).  He further stated that 
as now the ballot papers have been printed, therefore, the 
respondent and petitioner both be allowed to contest the election, 
as according to him no forgery has been established against him 
before the Election Tribunal to the effect that he has tampered 
with any document or produced a fake or bogus document. 
C.P.No.756-L of 2013 
- 6 - 
 
8. 
 
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties    
and have gone through the documents produced before us 
including the judgment recorded by the Election Tribunal as      
far back as on 22.05.2007 therein he was found not qualified     
to contest the election on the basis that the matriculation 
certificate relied upon by him was disowned by the BISE.  Such 
findings have become conclusive as though he filed a Constitution 
Petition but without getting such findings set aside withdrew    
the same,  therefore, a case for leave to appeal is made out in 
order to examine as to whether the respondent is qualified to 
contest the election in terms of Article 62 (1) (f) of the 
Constitution.  
9. 
  
It is to be noted on having concluding that a case has 
been made out for grant of leave on the basis of earlier findings 
we have passed an order on 09.05.2013 in Civil Petition No.636 
of 2013 in the case of Miss Kalsum Khaliq Advocate, Islamabad v. 
The Election Commission of Pakistan, etc. pertaining to the 
interpretation of Article 63 (1) (o) of the Constitution of Islamic 
Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the candidate against whom 
evidence/finding was available on record was restrained from 
contesting the election of the provincial Assembly, therefore, 
following the same precedent and the observation made therein 
in this case too we direct that the respondent is restrained from 
contesting the election from constituency No. PP-61 Faisalabad. 
C.P.No.756-L of 2013 
- 7 - 
 
The case is ordered to be fixed for a date in office after effecting 
service upon the respondents. 
 
 
 
 
 
CJ. 
 
 
 
 
 
Islamabad 
J. 
 
10.05.2013 
*Hashmi* 
J.