Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 409‑R of 1985, decided on 5th November, 1985.

(On appeal from judgment and order of Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench Rawalpindi, dated 6‑10‑1985 in Writ Petition No.345 of 1985).

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Punjab Local Councils (Election Petitions) Rules, 1979, R.15‑‑Punjab Local Councils (Election) Rules, 1979, R.28(1)‑‑Election to Local Council‑‑Interruption of polls by open violence‑‑Large number of voters could not exercise their right to vote‑‑Tribunal declared election as a whole void and ordered fresh election‑‑Decision impugned‑ Plea that Tribunal had no jurisdiction to declare election void, and order fresh election repelled‑‑Polling having been disturbed and stopped by open violence and Presiding Officer admittedly having failed to record any reason for stopping poll or to report matter to Deputy Commissioner and Election Authority, Tribunal was competent to declare election as a whole to be void‑‑Finding of Tribunal being unexceptionable, High Court's order dismissing writ petition upheld‑‑Leave to appeal refused.

Ahmed Raza Khan Kasuri, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

M. Bilal, Advocate Supreme Court with Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.

Date of hearing: 5th November, 1985.

‑The petitioner was declared elected to the Union Council, Munara, from Ward No.2 in the election held on 28‑9‑1984 while the respondents 2 and 3 were defeated. The second respondent filed an election petition under section 24 of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979 challenging the election. One of the grounds raised in the petition was that the result of the appeal was materially affected because of the interruption of the poll by open violence which was accepted by the learned Tribunal and the election as a whole was declared void and fresh election was ordered.

2. The petitioner filed a constitutional petition in the Lahore High Court challenging the decision of the Election Tribunal, which was dismissed on 6‑10‑1985. It appears from the impugned judgment that finding of fact alone was challenged before the High Court and no legal pleas were raised. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended before us that the Election Tribunal had no jurisdiction to declare the election void on the ground that the poll was interrupted by open violence as under rule 28 of the Local Council (Election) Rules, 1979 the Presiding Officer alone had jurisdiction to order fresh poll.

3. The contention has no force, Rule 15 of the Punjab Local Councils (Election Petitions) Rules, 1979 sufficiently empowers the Tribunal to declare an election as a whole to be void, inter alia, if it is satisfied that the result of the election had been materially affected by reason of:‑

(a) the failure of any person to comply with the provisions of the Ordinance or the Election Rules; or

(b) the prevalence of extensive corrupt or illegal practice at the election.

Under sub‑rule (1) of rule 28 of the Local Councils (Election) Rules, 1979 it is the duty of the Presiding Officer to stop the poll after recording reason for doing so and inform the Returning Officer accordingly. After doing so, it is for the Election Authority to declare the poll at the particular polling station to be void and direct a fresh poll at that polling station. In the instant case the Presiding Officer had admittedly failed either to record any reason for stopping the poll or to report the matter to the Deputy Commissioner and the Election Authority. In the result a large number of voters could not exercise their right to vote.

4. It was thus a clear case of non‑compliance of the statutory rules and the Tribunal was competent under the abovementioned clause (a) of Rule 15 of the Election Petition Rules, 1979 to pass the order as it did. As to the question of the poll having been disturbed by open violence, the matter is not open to any examination as the issue was decided by the Tribunal on the basis of evidence produced before it. In the circumstances, the finding of the learned Election Tribunal was unexceptionable and the petition was rightly dismissed as per impugned judgment.

The petition has, therefore, no merits and is dismissed accordingly.

M.I. 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.