Case Details

Citation(s)
1987 SLG 821 1987 SLD 821 1987 SCMR 2048
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 618 of 1984, decision dated: 17-02-1985.Against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 15-5-1984, passed in Writ Petition No. 680 of 1984
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN AND SHAFIUR RAHMAN, JJ
Ch. Khurshid Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Dr. Farooq Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 1

RIAZUL HAQ

VS

Seth KHUSHI MUHAMMAD and another

Law:

Section:

Punjab Local Councils (Election Petitions) Rules, 1979-----R. 16(1)--Equality of votes--Use of word 'shall' in R.16(1) makes it clear that it is mandatory for Election Tribunal to itself draw lots when both candidates are found to have secured equal number of votes. ORDER ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-- This petition by Riazul Haq is directed against the judgment of the High Court, dated 19-2-1985, accepting respondent's writ petition (No. 680/84). 2. Facts giving rise to the present petition, briefly, are that Riazul Haq petitioner, Khushi Muhammad, respondents Nos. 1 and 2 others contested the election in 1983 to a seat in the Municipal Committee Okara, from Ward No. 5. During the polls 259 men and 242 women voted in favour of Riazul Haq. Out of these 2 votes were discarded as invalid leaving a total of 499.votes in his favour. As against this 267 men and 232 women voted in favour of Khushi Muhammad respondent No.1. As such total votes cast in his favour were also 499. The Returning Officer is, however, stated to have opened the packet of the 'tendered' ballot-papers and declared one of the votes cast in favour of Khushi Muhammad respondent as valid, with the result that he was found to have secured one vote more than the petitioner and was, therefore, declared to be successful. 3. Feeling aggrieved Riazul Haq petitioner challenged the respondent's election through an Election Petition. The Election Tribunal, after due inquiry into the matter, held that since both the candidates had secured equal votes (i.e. 499 each) and that the Returning Officer should have proceeded to draw lots as provided by Rule 40(7) of the Punjab Local Government Election Rules, 1979. It then remanded the case to the Returning Officer for drawing of lots. It may be mentioned that the petitioner had also taken a number of other objections in his election petition but his learned counsel states that after the Election Tribunal had reached the above-noted conclusion he (the counsel) gave up the other objections. 4. On remand the Returning Officer proceeded with the drawing of lots, which turned up in petitioner's favour, who was, therefore, declared as successful. Khushi Muhammad respondent,…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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