| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1955 SLG 11 1955 SLD 11 1955 PLD 344 |
Lahore High Court
Second Appeal No. 131 of 1954, decided on 12th January 1955, from the decree of the Court of Khan Zia Ullah Khan, Senior Civil Judge, Gujranwala, dated the 31st March 1954, affirming that of Ch. Hamid Ullah, Civil judge, 1st Class, Gujranwala, dated the 2
ABDUL AZIZ KHAN, J
Mian Muhammad Shafa, for Appellant. Zakria Kitchlew and S. A. Mahmud, for
Respondents
Second Appeal No. 131 of 1954, decided on 12th January 1955, from the decree of the Court of Khan Zia Ullah Khan, Senior Civil Judge, Gujranwala, dated the 31st March 1954, affirming that of Ch. Hamid Ullah, Civil judge, 1st Class, Gujranwala, dated the 2
ABDUL AZIZ KHAN, J
Mian Muhammad Shafa, for Appellant. Zakria Kitchlew and S. A. Mahmud, for
Respondents
MUHAMMAD ISMAIL
VS
MUHAMMAD SHARIF and others
Law: Punjab Municipal Election Rules, 1952
Section: 3(4),21,24,67
Election to Municipal body-Provincial Government cannot invalidate an election. in the guise of amending, varying or modifying election programme under Municipal Election Rules, 1952, rule 3 (4)-Civil suit by plaintiff whose election was thus invalidated competent. The nomination papers of the plaintiff and defendant in respect of election to the Municipality of the town of Hafizabad were accepted by the officer appointed for this purpose under Rule 21 of the Municipal Election Rules 1952. On revision, however, the Deputy Commissioner rejected the nomination papers of the defendant. As a result of this decision the plaintiff was deemed to have been duly elected under rule 24 of the rules. Later, the Election Officer amended the election programme under rule 3 (4) and invalidated all the proceedings that had so far taken place including the election of plaintiff by operation of rule 24. Thereupon the plaintiff filed a suit for a declaration that no fresh elections could take place in respect of the ward from which he had been elected to the Municipality. The defendant pleaded that the suit did not lie and that the Election Officer could order a fresh election by amending the programme. Held, the plaintiff who must be deemed to have been duly elected by the operation of rule 24, could not be dislodged by merely varying the election programme under rule 3 (4) of the rules. He could be unseated only by means of an election petition as provided by the Municipal Act and the Rules. Further, that it is true that if a statute creates a right and also provides a special machinery for enforcing that right, the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts is excluded in matters relating to the right created by the statute but in the present case, the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts was not barred because :-(a) the right of the plaintiff to act as member of the Municipality accrued as soon as he was elected within the meaning of rule 24 ; (b) the Municipal Act or the Rules did not provide him with a special machinery for enforcing that right ; and (c) there was an apparent infringement of the aforesaid right inasmuch as the Provincial Government ignored the relevant sections of the…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492