KARACHI: The Islamabad High Court has dismissed the writ petition of M Asif Dar against Pakistan Tennis Federation’s elections, stating that the petitioner has no locus standi and PTF does not fall within the definition of a person or authority subject to writ jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution.
This was stated by Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, the judge, in his order. However, he stated, that “any person aggrieved by the election process may approach the Pakistan Sports Board in accordance with its Constitution for appropriate relief”.
According to details, former Secretary PTF Asif Dar filed a writ petition (No. 1105-2024) with the IHC and challenged the results of the elections of the federation held on February 2, 2024, contending that same were conducted without lawful authority and are of no legal effect.
He also prayed for the fresh elections of the PTF after notification of the relevant regulations, in accordance with the earlier order of this court passed in writ petition (No. 2524/2022).
It is worth adding here that the same court while hearing the writ petition (No.2524/2022) directed on July 18, 2022 that no election of any National Sports Federation shall take place until the Election Commission is notified under the Pakistan Sports Board Constitution, 2022.
However, contrary to the direction of this court and the advice of the PSB the PTF issued a schedule and conducted elections on February 10, 2024, which have been challenged through the instant petition.
Meanwhile, Assistant Attorney General, along with officials from the PTF and the Ministry of Inter-Provincial Coordination, submitted that the elections were conducted in accordance with applicable rules and the results were duly notified.
They further argued that the petitioner lacked locus standi (the right or capacity to bring an action or to appear in a court) to challenge the said elections, as he had failed to demonstrate any prejudice to his justiciable legal rights.
It was submitted that the petitioner did not fall within the category of an “aggrieved person” under Article 199 of the Constitution and was in fact litigating on behalf of a losing candidate, who was not even a party to the proceedings.
Interestingly, this aspect was confronted to the petitioner during hearing, where he candidly admitted that he was not a candidate in the previous elections and that no personal legal right of the petitioner had been affected.
Thus, the court order mentioned that “it is a settled principle that under Article 199 of the Constitution, this Court may only issue directions to persons or institutions performing functions in connection with the affairs of the Federation, a Province, or a local authority.
“The Pakistan Tennis Federation, however, is not a statutory body; it has not been established by or under any statute. It is a private, nonprofit organization registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, and functions autonomously under its own Constitution.
“The PTF is not substantially funded or controlled by the Government of Pakistan; rather, bulk of its functions is independently carried out and is privately funded. Therefore, the PTF does not qualify as a body amenable to judicial review under Article 199 of the Constitution”.
