Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition No. 549 of 1982, decided on 23rd June, 1982.

(From the order dated 16-5-1982 of the Lahore High Court passed in Writ Petition No. 1772 of 1982).

-- R. 15-Nomination papers, rejection of-Nomination papers of respondents rejected by Returning Officer but such order set aside on appeal and nomination papers restored by Deputy Commissioner Order challenged in writ proceedings, on ground of appeal before Deputy Commissioner being time-barred, not properly instituted, not accompanied by certified copy of order appealed against and Deputy Commissioner having passed order without holding proper inquiry into genuineness of signatures on nomination papers- All such grounds rejected by High Court, first two on ground of Assistant Commissioner having not furnished copy of his order to respondent, nor did he submit a copy thereof to Deputy Commissioner, third on ground of Assistant Commissioner having himself conducted no inquiry and rejected nomination papers without recording satisfac tion merely upon objection raised before him that they seem to be bogus"-.Situation, held, calls for no interference with view taken by High Court.

Ch. Azimuddin, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 23rd June, 1982

-Petitioner Mst. Sameeri and respondent Mst. Nazeeran Bibi had filed nomination papers for a woman's seat in Union Council, Padana, Tehsil Chunian, District Kasur. In the result of the scrutiny, the nomination papers of the respondent were rejected by the Assistant Commissioner/Returning Officer, on 6-5-1982, but on appeal the order was set aside and her nomination papers were restored by the Deputy Commis sioner on 9-5-1982. The petitioner challenged the order of the Deputy Commissioner in Writ Petition No. 1772 of 1982 but the same was dismissed in limine on 16-5-1982. The election was held on 19-5-1982, in which the respondent was successful.

2. In this petition seeking 'leave to appeal from the order of the High Court. It has been urged that the appeal before the Deputy Commissioner had been barred by time, that it bad not been properly instituted as it was not accompanied by certified copy of the order appealed against and that the Deputy Commissioner had made his impugned order without hold in an proper inquiry into the genuineness of the signatures on the nomination papers. All these grounds had been taken before the High Court and rejected the first two for the reason that the Assistant Commissioner had not furnished copy of his order to the respondent as required by sub-rule (5) of Rule 15 of the Punjab Local Councils (Election) Rules, 1979, nor had he submitted a copy thereof to the Deputy Commissioner as required by sub-rule (b)'of the said Rule. On the third point, the High Court held that the Assistant Commissioner bad himself conducted no inquiry and had without recording satisfaction proceeded to reject the 'respondent 's nomination papers merely upon an objection raised before him that they "seem to be bogus"

3. After hearing learned counsel, we are satisfied that the situation calls for no interference with the view taken by the High Court. The petition is dismissed.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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