Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

GHULAM BARI versus ELECTION TRIBUNAL


Punjab Local Councils (Election Petitions) Rules 1979 R15 Provisional Constitutional Order (1 of 1981), Article 9 Petitioner has no objection to the question of the age of the Councilor elected by the Election Tribunal, depending on the entries in the Election Tribunal Birth Register and the Chauchadra Register. Consequently, the Election Tribunal concluded that the applicant's papers on the last day of filing nomination were below the required age at which the respondent was selected at the applicant's place, however, could not be sustained. ? Be treated with voting, as the Tribunal could not discover that the applicant's disqualification was infamous, therefore, it was necessary in the circumstances.

1985 C L C 2899

[Lahore]

Before Muhammad Zafarullah, J

GHULAM BARI--Petitioner

Versus

ELECTION TRIBUNAL and others--Respondent

Writ Petition No. 2308 of 1984, decided on 10th June, 1985.

Punjab Local Council (Election Petitions) Rules, 1979--

---R. 15--Provisional Constitution Order (1 of 1981), Art. 9--Petitioner elected as Councillor unseated by Election Tribunal on question of age--Election Tribunal relying on entries in Birth Register and Chowkidara Register--No objection, held, could be taken against findings of Election Tribunal that petitioner was below requisite age on last day of filing of nomination papers--Order declaring respondent as having been elected in place of appellant, however, could not be sustained--Majority of votes cast in favour of petitioner could not be treated as thrown away votes as there was no finding of Tribunal that disqualification of petitioner was notorious--F, ash polls, therefore, were necessary in circumstances.

Mian Saeed-ur-Rahman Farrukh for Petitioner.

Rafiq Ahmad Bajwa for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 10th June, 1985.

JUDGMENT

Ghulam Bari petitioner was declared elected to a seat in Ward No.4, Union Council 173, Chak No. 197/RB, Faisalabad. He was, however, unseated by the orders of the Election Tribunal, dated 21-5-1984 when it was. found by the Tribunal that Ghulam Bari was not qualified to contest the election as he was not of 25 years of age on the last date of filing of nomination papers. The Election Tribunal also declared Muhammad lqbal Anwar respondent to be the returned candidate in the resultant vacancy. Ghulam Bari petitioner has challenged the orders of Election Tribunal by way of a writ petition.

2. As regards the age of Ghulam Bari petitioner the Election Tribunal rightly relied on the entries in the Birth Register and the Chowkidara Register. No objection, therefore, can be taken against the findings of the Election Tribunal that the petitioner was below the requisite age on the last date of filing of nomination papers. As regards the orders of Muhammad lqbal Anwar of being declared as elected in place of the petitioner this cannot be sustained as the majority of votes cast in favour of Ghulam Bari cannot be treated as thrown away votes as there is no finding that the disqualification of the petitioner was notorious. This writ petition is, therefore, allowed only to the extent of the election of Muhammad lqbal Anwar, respondent. In consequence it is necessary to hold fresh poll for the seat in Ward No.4 of Union Council No.173. There shall be no order as to costs.

A. A. Petition allowed.

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.