IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE EJAZ AFZAL KHAN 
MR. JUSTICE SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD 
MR. JUSTICE FAISAL ARAB 
 
CIVIL PETITION NO. 3499 OF 2016 
(On appeal against the order dated 25.10.2016 passed by the 
Lahore High Court, Multan Bench in Writ Petition No. 
15172/2016) 
 
Malik Abid Hussain 
… Petitioner 
VERSUS 
 
Returning Officer, Wards 1 to 47 Municipal Committee etc 
… Respondents 
 
For the Petitioner: 
Mr. Dil Muhammad Khan Alizai, ASC 
 
Mr. Mehmood A. Sheikh, AOR (Absent) 
 
 
For the Respondents: 
N.R. 
 
Date of Hearing:  
15.11.2016 
 
Announced on: 
 
16.11.2016 
 
 
JUDGMENT 
 
 
 
FAISAL ARAB, J.- The petitioner was one of the 
candidates on the reserved seat of ‘Worker’ of the Municipal 
Committee, Muzaffargarh. Respondent No. 2, who was also a 
candidate for the said seat, sought rejection of petitioner’s nomination 
papers on the ground that the petitioner is not a worker as he holds 
LPG dealership and operates his business from a business concern 
established in the name of ‘Malik Electro Gas Centre, Multan Road, 
Muzzaffargarh; that being a businessman, he is a tax payer having 
0114289-5 as his National Tax Number and has also been elected as 
President of the LPG Union, Muzzaffargarh. Respondent No.2’s plea for 
rejection of petitioner’s nomination papers however did not find favour 
with the Returning Officer, who accepted latter’s nomination.  
 
2. 
 
The acceptance of petitioner’s nomination was challenged 
by Respondent No. 2  in Election Appeal No. 08/2016 before the 
Additional District & Sessions Judge, Muzaffargarh who was the 
Civil Petition No. 3499/2016 
2
Appellate Authority for the Local Bodies Elections, 2016. After taking 
into consideration contents of the letter written by DCO Muzzaffargarh 
to the Secretary Industries, Government of Punjab, wherein the 
petitioner was shown as one of the distributors of LPG in the District 
of Muzaffargarh and the contents of the daily report of District Office 
(Civil Defence) regarding LPG prices issued by the District Officer (Civil 
Defence) Muzaffargarh which reflected the name of the petitioner as 
dealer/distributer of LPG and the fact that the petitioner held the 
office of the President of LPG Union, the Appellate Authority came to 
the conclusion that the petitioner does not fall within the ambit of the 
definition of ‘worker’ as defined in Section 2 (mmm) of the Punjab 
Local Government Act, 2013 and rejected his nomination papers vide 
order dated 22.10.2016. The petitioner then challenged the decision of 
the Appellate Authority in Writ Petition No. 15172/2016 before the 
Lahore High Court, Multan Bench but the same was dismissed vide 
impugned order dated 25.10.2016, hence this petition. 
 
3. 
 
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the 
petitioner’s claim of being a ‘worker’ ought not to have been rejected 
summarily at pre-election stage and in case the petitioner is elected, 
the same can be challenged after the election. He concluded by stating 
that depriving the petitioner of his right to contest the elections in 
summary proceedings amounts to disenfranchising him. In support of 
this contention he relied upon the case of Muhammad Mujtaba 
Abdullah Vs. Appellate Authority Tehsil Liaquatpur District Rahim Yar 
Khan (2016 SCMR 893).  
 
4. 
 
It has undisputedly come on the record that the petitioner 
is a dealer of LPG and distributes LPG from his business concern i.e. 
‘Malik Electro Gas Centre, Multan Road, Muzzaffargarh’. He also held 
the office of President of LPG Union which takes care of the business 
of the traders who sell LPG gas to consumers from their outlets in 
Tehsil Muzaffargarh. As a tax payer, the petitioner has a National Tax 
Number as well. In the decision rendered by the Appellate Authority, 
which has been affirmed in impugned judgment, it is clearly stated 
that on an inquiry from DCO Muzaffargarh, the Secretary Industries, 
Government of Punjab confirmed that the petitioner is one of the LPG 
distributors of District Muzaffargarh, having dealership contract for 
Civil Petition No. 3499/2016 
3
Muzaffargarh Tehsil. We have also noted that status of the petitioner, 
that was made basis for rejecting his nomination papers by the 
Appellate Authority, has not been specifically denied by the petitioner 
either in memo of Writ Petition that he filed in the High Court or in the 
present petition seeking leave to appeal. The Punjab Local Government 
Act, 2013 has defined ‘worker’ in Section 2 (mmm) in the following 
words: “‘worker’ means a person directly engaged in work or is 
dependent on personal labour for subsistence living and includes a 
worker as defined in the Punjab Industrial Relations Act, 2010.”  Thus 
only such person, who is directly engaged in physical work and for his 
subsistence rely on physical labour or falls within the definition of 
‘worker’ as contained in the Punjab Industrial Relations Act, 2010 
qualifies to contest election on the reserved seat of ‘worker’ and not a 
person who is a businessman or a trader. Similar view has been taken 
by this Court in the case of Muhammad Hussain Vs. District Returning 
Officer (2008 SCMR 488). 
 
5. 
 
In the present case the petitioner has nowhere denied his 
status of being a dealer/distributor of LPG for the Tehsil of 
Muzaffargarh. Being in the business of LPG, the petitioner also did not 
deny that he held the position of the President of LPG Union of 
Muzaffargarh that comprises of LPG traders of Muzaffargarh, he 
therefore cannot arrogate to himself the status of a worker as defined 
in the Punjab Local Government Act, 2013. We therefore find no legal 
justification to interfere with the impugned order. This petition having 
no merit is accordingly dismissed and leave is refused.  
 
JUDGE 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
Islamabad, the 
 
Announced on 16.11.2016 by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Faisal Arab 
Approved For Reporting 
 
Khurram 
