KARACHI, Feb 14: The Sindh High Court reserved on Monday its judgment on a joint petition moved by the four relieved nazims and two deputy nazims of the province's bifurcated districts for their restoration.

At the end of the proceedings, a division bench, comprising Justices Sarmad Jalal Osmany and Zia Pervez, asked both sides to submit synopses of their arguments.

Winding up his submissions earlier, the petitioners' counsel, Rasheed A. Razvi, contended that the petitioner nazims should have been allowed to stay and complete their tenure as joint nazims of their bifurcated districts till fresh local government elections.

Asked by the bench whether there was any provision in the Sindh Local Government Ordinance, 2001, envisaging one nazim for two districts, the counsel said there was no prohibition in the law. The bench observed that like the advocate-general, he was also asking it to 'read into the statute'.

Advocate Razvi said following the Balochistan precedent, at least the nazims should continue in one of the new districts where they were registered as voters. He said a nazim was disqualified or could be removed on a number of counts but there was no provision in the SLGO declaring that he shall cease to hold office on the bifurcation of his district.

He could be suspended by the chief minister for misconduct or violation of his directives, but the CM's action must be approved by the provincial assembly within 30 days.

The bench remarked that though the revenue districts created under the Sindh Land Revenue Act became electoral districts under the SLGO, a notification of their coming into existence under the latter should also have separately been issued.

It corrected the counsel when he said that the local government law was a federal statute. It might have been conceived by the National Reconstruction Bureau, a federal government department, but the law came into force under the authority of the provincial government as a governor's ordinance, the bench pointed.

Replying to a court query, the counsel said there was no difference between the words 'become vacant' and 'fall vacant', Mr Razvi said the expressions were interchangeable. The bench observed that vacancies were ultimately filled by holding by elections.

Mr Razvi requested the court to interpret the law in the light of the constitutional provisions dealing with local government and the object and spirit of the SLGO itself.

He said a court could neither correct a mistake in a piece of legislation nor supply a deficiency. Its function was to ascertain the intention of the legislature as expressly declared and give effect to it, the petitioners' counsel said.