The Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz (PML-N) has filed a review petition in the Supreme Court on Monday challenging a judgment by the full court regarding reserved seats and seeking a stay on the implementation of the court's short order from July 12.
While questioning the grounds for awarding reserved seats to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), the petition argued that PTI was not a party to the original case.
A detailed judgment in the case of the reserved seat, including detailed reasons from all of the 13 judges, is yet to come.
Monday's petition was filed by Advocate Haris Azmat on behalf of PML-N. It listed the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC), its chairman Sahibzada Hamid Raza, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and others as respondents.
The petition stated that the findings of the 8-5 majority judgment were beyond the pleadings of the parties.
"The issue of granting the reserved seats to PTI was not even in the pleadings of SIC, and hence the same cannot be granted," the review petition stated, adding that it is a cardinal and well-settled principle in Pakistani jurisprudence that "parties are bound by their pleadings".
"In the instant case, neither SIC sought this relief, nor pleaded for the same. Hence, order under review may be recalled," the petition stated, adding that it was a case of the SIC, not the PTI.
"The entire contest was whether SIC is entitled to the reserved seats? Hence, with respect, the order under review has given findings which were beyond the scope of the lis at hand, therefore, cannot be sustained."
It further contended that the SIC and PTI are two separate political parties and two separate entities, but the majority judgment treated both parties as one party with different names, which is not permissible under the law.
"It is submitted and reiterated here that PTI neither filed any case before the ECP, nor before Peshawar High Court, nor before the Supreme Court, hence it is not entitled to any relief, let alone a relief which was not even pleaded," it said.
"The order under review has not taken into account that 80 MNAs had filed their nomination papers as independent candidates and then as independent candidates joined SIC."
The petition contended: "None has even come forward to state otherwise; therefore, the assumption in the order under review that the said MNAs are PTI candidates is with respect liable to be reviewed."
"Even according to the order under review, there are 41 returned candidates who have not even shown affiliation with PTI even in one of the columns of the list submitted by ECP, the said candidates have been given a 15-day period to join any political party."
The PML-N submitted that this was a novel procedure that starkly contradicts the Constitution, Election Act, and settled jurisprudence.
The party further submitted that even the short orders by Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail have also held that any candidate elected to remain independent or has withdrawn his candidature as a PTI candidate cannot be termed a PTI candidate.
"All the returned candidates have already joined SIC, and hence, there is no question of giving them an option of joining PTI that too after many months of the election. It is also against Rule 92 (6) of the Election Rules, 2017, which states that once an independent candidate has joined a political party, there is no option to recall or cancel."
The petition added, "By carving out a procedure which is not provided under the Constitution, Order under Review might have gone into the realm of creating and not just interpreting the Constitution which is against the long-standing jurisprudence of this Honourable Court."