Law: Basic Democracies Order (18 of 1959)

Section: 11(5),12(2),89,92(6)

Law: Basic Democracies (Amendment) Act (XVI of 1965)

Section: 25

Law: West Pakistan Basic Democracies (Election of Chairman) Rules, 1960

Section: 7

(a) Basic Democracies Order (18 of 1959)-------   ----Arts. 11(5), 12(2), 89, 92(6) & Sixth Sch., item 3 read with Basic Democracies (Amendment) Act (XVI, of 1965), S. 25-Omission, from Sixth Sch., of item No. 3 dealing specifically with election of Chairman --Does not have effect of depriving Government of powers to make rules on subject-Omission does not affect validity or existence of West Pakistan Basic Democracies (Election of Chairman) Rules, 1960 which under Art. 92(6) of Order forms part of that Order -Article 11(5) contemplates rules not only in respect of casting of votes and counting thereafter but as regards determination of election disputes by way of appeal or election petition as well --West Pakistan Basic Democracies (Election of Chairman) Rules, 1960, r. 7.   Where the contention was that after the deletion of item No. 3 from the Sixth Schedule to the Basic Democracies Order, 1959, by section 25 of the Basic Democracies (Amendment) Act, 1965, the provision contained in rule 7 of the West Pakistan Basic Democracies (Election of Chairman) Rules, 1960 dealing with election petitions also came to an end it was held that the argument could not be accepted as sound.   If this contention is accepted as correct then the Governor is not competent to make any rules now under section 89 of the Order for the election of Chairman. If this be the case, then not only that rule 7, dealing with the election petitions, will cease to have any, existence, but the effect of this will be that the West Pakistan Basic Democracies (Election of Chairman) Rules, 1960, themselves will cease to exist. If the rules had no valid existence, the election of a person under the said Rules would also be without lawful authority and consequently of no legal effect. The Rules will stay as a whole or they will go as a whole.   The case can be looked from another angle as well. What has been done by the Amending Act XVI of 1965 is that item No. 3 has been omitted from the Sixth Schedule. If the contention be accepted that by this conscious omission, it was intended to take away the power of rule making from the Governor in respect of the election of the…