ISLAMABAD, Sept 30: A Supreme Court bench has observed that the Legal Framework Order, promulgated by the chief executive, has no value till the time it is validated by parliament and enforced after the revival of the Constitution.

The SC bench comprising Justice Qazi Mohammad Farooq, Justice Rana Bhagwan Das and Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar, on Monday refused to grant “leave to appeal” to the petitioner, who had sought disqualification of his opponent under the LFO.

The petitioner, Meer Mohabat Marri, had challenged the nomination papers of Nawabzada Amir Balach Marri, a candidate from PB-23 Kahlu, Balochistan.

Amir Balach’s papers were accepted by the returning officers but were rejected by the election tribunal which had declared that Amir Balach was not eligible to contest the elections as he had been dismissed from service for misconduct.

Amir Balach was, however, allowed by the Balochistan High Court to contest the polls. The petitioner had sought permission to impugn the BHC’s orders.

Justice Farooq observed that elections were not being held under the Constitution but under the Election Order, 2002.

It was argued by the counsel for the respondent that a civil servant dismissed on the grounds of “misconduct involving moral turpitude” could only be disqualified.

According to Ashraf Tanoli, counsel representing Meer Mohabat Marri, Justice Farooq observed that the LFO had not been enforced and the amendments made to the Constitution shall come to effect after the appointment of date by the Chief Executive for the revival of the Constitution.

The counsel for the petitioner had argued that Constitutional amendments made through the LFO had provided that any person dismissed for misconduct was not eligible to contest the elections. He was of the view that the LFO had come into effect from Aug 21, 2002, the day when the president had announced the LFO at a press conference.

The counsel contended that under the Representation of Peoples Act, a person was not eligible if he had been dismissed from service on the grounds of misconduct only.

The court was of the view that the Election Order 2002, had an overriding effect, and only that person was disqualified to contest if his dismissal from service was made on “misconduct involving moral turpitude.”