Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 4008 1996 SLD 4008 , 1996 PLD 12
High Court (AJ&K)
Writ Petition No. 96 of 1996, decided on 22nd May, 1996.
Presented By: Before Khawaja Muhammad Saeed, Actg. C.J., Syed Manzoor Hussain Gillani, Chaudhry Muhammad Taj, and Muhammad Siddique Farooqi, JJ
Raja Muhammad Anwar Khan for Petitioner. Muhammad Yusuf Khan, A.-G., Muhammad Hanif Khan, G.M. Mughal and Muhammad Ashfaq Kiyani for
Respondents

Sahibzada MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE ZAFAR, ADVOCATE---Petitioner

VERSUS

SPEAKER, LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD and 3 others---Respondent

Law: Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974

Section: 9 , 44

Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974)--- ----Ss. 9 & 44---Re-election of President of the State---President's tenure was to expire in August, 1996 but he resigned from his office on May 13, 1996-- Speaker issued Notification for the election of President and Chief Election Commissioner announced schedule of the election of the President---Petitioner challenging Notifications of Speaker as well as of Chief Election Commissioner to be without lawful authority and mala fide and that resignation of former President was mala fide and motivated---Validity---President under S.9 of the Constitution has the privilege to resign from his office for which he is not bound to assign any reason---Petitioner's contention. that outgoing President who could remain in office for further period of 2-1/2 months, resigned to get himself re- elected from the same Assembly for a further period of five years was mala fide, was misconceived for the reasons; that President was not bound to assign any reason for his resignation; that there was nothing on record that he was candidate to the election to the office of President; and that he, if at all was candidate to the fresh election to the office of the President, was not debarred/disqualified under any provisions of the Constitution to be a candidate for the office of the President afresh---Question of mala fide or motivated resignation being question of fact would require evidence and thorough inquiry---Instances and grounds of mala fides were to be specifically pleaded and pointed out---In absence of specific instances of mala fides, nothing could be attributed against respondents simply on the assertion of petitioner---Where a person was qualified under law to be a candidate for any election and was not by any specific prohibition debarred, he could not be deprived of such right simply for the reason that a person did not want him to be a candidate for the office or to see him in the office---Such ground if at all to be treated as a ground must be taken up before the Authority at the time of scrutiny of nomination papers and in case of failure of having decision of matter lawfully, same could be…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register