Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 264 of 1967, decided on 6th October 1967.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 29th May 1967, in Writ Petition No. 902 of 1965).
S. 58 read with Electoral College Rules, 1964, r. 36(1‑A)‑Presiding Officer noting number of voters on ballot paper as well as counterfoil‑Tribunal, on election petition, setting aside election as a whole but High Court although holding that secrecy of ballot violated, quashing order of Tribunal on ground that condition specified in r. 36(1‑A) not satisfied‑Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider propriety of High Court's order.
Zaki‑ud‑Din Pal, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Maqbool Ahmad Rana, Attorney for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 6th October 1967.
In this case it was found by the Election Tribunal that the secrecy of the ballot has been violated by the act of the Presiding Officer, who noted the numbers of the voters on the ballot papers as well as on their counterparts the Tribunal therefore set aside the election and ordered a fresh election. The respondent approached the High Court in writ jurisdiction and succeeded in obtaining an order setting aside the Election Tribunal's order dated the 5th May 1965, with no order as to costs. This is a petition for Special Leave to Appeal on behalf of Azmat Ali, calling in question the order of the High Court.
The learned Judges of the High Court have taken the view that rule 36(1‑A) of the Electoral College Rules, 1964, only enables the Tribunal to declare an election void if the result of the election had been materially affected by reason of the failure of any person to comply with; or the contravention of any provision of the Act, or these Rules. The learned Judges were of the opinion that this condition had not been satisfied in the present case, although it was found that the secrecy of the ballot had been violated. This view of the High Court is challenged as erroneous and merits consideration. Leave to appeal is therefore, granted as prayed. The petitioner will furnish security in the sum of Rs. 1,000 prior to the appeal being heard. In the meantime, the order of the High Court shall remain suspended.
leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer