Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 112 of 1982, decided on 12th January, 1982.

Art. 199 ‑ Writ jurisdiction ‑ Contention that only petitioner submitted nomination papers to Secretary ship of Bar Association election within time limit fixed by respondent and as such elected un opposed and nomination papers accepted thereafter being illegal be declared as Ouch‑Punjab Bar Council, however, having supervisory jurisdiction over affairs of Bar Association, petitioner, held, can seek remedy through its offices‑Adjudication of contention requires in vestigation of facts‑Difficult to embark upon same in writ jurisdiction.

Ejaz Anwar for Petitioner.

Date of hearing: 12th January, 1982.

The Annual General Election of the Bar Association Narowal, is to be held on 'I4‑1‑1982, in accordance with the "Memorandum of Association" (Annexure E'), prepared by the Punjab Bar Council, in exercise of the powers vesting in it under the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973. The petitioner's grievance is that the Election Board i. e. respondent No. 3, fixed the time for filing nomination papers, as from 3‑(‑1982‑5‑00 p. m. to 12.00 Noon of 5‑1‑1981; only the petitioner submitted his nomination paper for Secretary-ship during this time limit and that, therefore, he stood elect unopposed; it is not open to the Election Board to hold election for this post and permit others who filed their nomination papers after this inter regnum, to participate in election as candidates. In this connection the petitioner has referred to Annexure D' which is a certificate issued by the Sitting Secretary of the Bar Association, showing the time when each candidate filed his nomination papers. It transpires from this document that there is another candidate namely Syed Abbas Mustafa Bokhari, in the field who filed the nomination papers for Secretaryship, one at 12.20 p. m. on 5‑1‑1980 and the other on the following day at 11‑30 a. m. Seemingly, the stand of the Election Board is that the time was extended by it for receiving the nomination papers.

2. Ch. Muhammad Forooq, Advocate, the Vice Chairman of the Punjab Bar. Council has entered appearance, under the direction of the court I have heard him as well as the petitioner's learned counsel.

3. It appears that the Punjab Bar Council has a supervisory jurisdiction over the affairs of the Bar Association in the Province. Even under Article 64 of the "Memorandum 'of Association", the Executive Committee of the Punjab Bar Council can look into the illegalities committed during the conduct of election, if in this behalf, it is moved through an election petition. The petitioner is thus not without a remedy. Further more, the adjudica tion of the contentions raised by the learned counsel would require investiga tion of facts. It would be difficult to embark upon such an exercise writ jurisdiction. The petitioner's remedy thus lies in moving the Punjab Bar Council.

7. This writ petition, therefore, cannot be entertained and is disposed of accordingly. However, it would be open to the petitioner to contest the election scheduled for I4‑1‑1982. If he participates in the election, that would be without prejudice to his claim of having been elected earlier unopposed.

M. Y. M. Petition disposed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.