Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No.4720 'of 1984, heard on 17th June, 1986.

‑‑‑Art.199‑‑Punjab Local Government Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.24‑ Punjab Local Councils (Election Petition) Rules, 1979, Rr.8 & 9‑‑Election petition‑‑Oral evidence, refusal to record‑‑Effect‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of‑‑There being no justification to shut parties from adducing oral evidence required for determination of controversial issue, Election Tribunal, held, acted arbitrarily in refusing to record oral evidence sought to be produced by parties‑‑Order of Election Tribunal was declared illegal by High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction in circumstances.

C. M. Latif Rawn for Petitioner.

Taqi Ahmad Khan for Respondent No.1.

Date of hearing: 17^th June, 1986.

.‑‑Ali Asghar petitioner contested election to a seat in the Union Council No.34, District Sialkot in the last Local Council elections held in September, T983. He having polled highest votes was declared a returned candidate. On Election Petition, filed by respondent No.1 the learned Election Tribunal on 8‑10‑1984 vide impugned order declared the election as a whole void and directed re‑election. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner by means of this petition has invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court in the matter.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the learned Election Tribunal only consulted the Election material, and did not allow the parties to lead oral evidence in support of their pleas which resulted in gross miscarriage of justice.

3. Learned counsel for contesting‑respondent was enable to controvert the contention advanced by his adversary. As a matter of fact the contention found support from the observation of the Tribunal recorded in the impugned order itself.

4. We have noticed that the Election Tribunal acted illegally in declining to record oral evidence, sought to be produced by the parties. In our view, there was hardly any justification to shut this parties from adducing oral evidence required for determination of the controversial issue. We feel no hesitation in observing that the learned Election Tribunal acted arbitrarily in refusing to record oral evidence in this case. The impugned order is, therefore, declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal affect.

5. In the result this petition is allowed and the case is remanded to the learned Election Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law preferably within three months from the date of this order. The parties are, however, left to bear their own costs.

H.B.T. Petition allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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