PESHAWAR, Sept 16: The Peshawar High Court on Friday restrained two union council nazims, possessing seminary Sanads (certificates), from taking oath of their office. A two-member bench comprising Justice Qaim Jan Khan and Justice Fazalur Rehman Khan issued notices to Shrengal Union Council nazim Bakht Alam and Gawaldai (Upper Dir) Union Council nazim Abdul Ghaffar.

The court also accepted an application filed by a candidate Haji Saltanat Khan, who had lost to Abdul Ghaffar, praying the court to make him respondent in the petition as he was a party in the case.

The two nazims had filed writ petitions in the high court prior to the second phase of the local government elections held on Aug 25 and had challenged the rejection of their nomination papers on the ground that they possessed Sanads of seminaries.

The high court had granted them interim relief and allowed them to contest polls along with scores of other candidates. The high court had ruled that the Sanad of Shahadatul Sanvia Aama was equivalent to matriculation, a condition mandatory for the candidates contesting for post of nazim.

The rival candidates of the two nazims have filed applications in the two petitions and requested the court to stay their taking of oath as the Supreme Court has ruled that Sanad was not equivalent to matriculation or secondary school certificate.

One of the applicant Bacha Saleh has lost to Bakt Alam.

Advocate Abdul Lateef Afridi appeared for Bacha Saleh, whereas Atlas Khan Dagai represented Haji Saltanat Khan.

Lateef Afridi contended that the full bench of the apex court had on Aug 16 given guidelines for the courts to follow while deciding cases pertaining to Sanads. He contended that in the light of the SC judgment only those candidates possessing Sanads would be considered qualified who had passed compulsory subjects of English, Urdu and Pakistan Studies.

Mr Afridi contended that the petitions were filed prior to the holding of the polls and should be decided by the high court and not the election tribunal concerned.

He added that if petitioner Bakht Alam was allowed to take oath the applicant, Bacha Saleh, would face irreparable loss. He added that after the Supreme Court’s judgment it was clear that the petitioner was not qualified to contest polls.