Law:

Section:

Brief facts of the case are that petitioners and respondents Nos.2 to 5 contested the election of Nazim and Naib Nazim for Union Council No.47, Mitro, Tehsil Mailsi, District Vehari. At the time of scrutiny of the nomination papers, an objection was raised by the respondents that petitioner No.1 is a defaulter of National Bank of Pakistan, therefore, under section 14(j) of the Punjab Local Government Elections Ordinance, 2000, was disqualified. Resultantly, on this objection, the learned Returning Officer rejected the nomination papers of the petitioner. The petitioners went in appeal. Their appeal was also dismissed by the District Returning Officer. The petitioners then filed Writ Petition No.3878 of 2001, which was disposed of with a direction than the petitioners shall deposit a sum or Rs.20,00,000 and with this condition their nomination papers were accepted. However, the same was further subject to a decision to be made by the Banking Court and any other forum before whom the election can be challenged. The parties went to polls and as a result thereof, the petitioners were elected as Nazim and Naib Nazim respectively. Respondents Nos.2 and 3 filed election petition against the petitioners and challenged their election on the same ground of being defaulter. The same was contested by the present petitioners. The learned Tribunal vide order dated 6-7-2002, accepted the election petition, declared both the petitioners to be disqualified for contesting the elections of Nazim and Naib Nazim on the ground of being adjudged defaulter and as a consequence thereof, respondents Nos.2 and 3 have been declared to be returned candidates. This order is being assailed through the instant writ petition.   Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that at the time, when the nomination papers were filed; a suit for the recovery of certain amount, filed by the National Bank of Pakistan was pending against petitioner No. 1. However, the same was decreed by learned Banking Court No. 1 on 27-9-2001 and a decree for an amount of Rs.28,04,214 was passed against him. Therefore, it is argued that when the nomination papers were filed, there was no adjudication against…