Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 1141 2004 SLD 1141 2004 SCMR 1242
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 1550 of 2003, decision dated: 27-04-2004.(On appeal from the judgment dated 31 7 2003 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Writ Petition No. 18509 of 2002)
NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, C.J., JAVED IQBAL AND ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, JJ
Sahebzada Ahmad Raza Khan Qasuri Senior Advocate, Supreme Court and Ch. Karam Ellahi Bhatti, Advocate on-Record for Petitioner. Shahzad Shoukat, Advocate Supreme Court and M.S. Khattak, Advocate on-Record for
Respondent No. 3

Sardar TARIQ JAVAID

VS

PROVINCIAL ELECTION COMMISSION OF PUNJAB and 8 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- Art. 185(3) Petition for leave to appeal Concurrent findings of two Courts below recorded on factual aspect of the case, could not be interfered with by the Supreme Court. (b) Punjab Local Government Elections Ordinance (V of 2000) S. 14(1) Punjab Local Government Elections Rules, 2000, R.16(4) ¬ Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3) Election of Nazim/Naib Nazim of Union Council Disqualification Thrown away, doctrine of Applicability Disqualification of returned candidates Votes given for a candidate who is disqualified may, in certain circumstances, be regarded as not given at all or thrown away and for so deciding a scrutiny is not necessary Disqualification must be founded on some positive and definite fact existing and established at the time of poll so as to lead to the fair inference of wilful perverseness on the part of the electors voting for the disqualified person If, however, the disqualification is not notorious and depends on legal argument or upon complicated facts and inferences it would appear that even though the candidate may be unseated by reason of his disqualification, the votes given to him will not be thrown away so as to give the seat to the candidate with the next highest number of votes mainly for the reason that the voters cannot be disfranchised for no fault on their part ¬Election Tribunal as well as the High Court, in the present case, had seriously erred in declaring the next candidates as duly elected though they had secured 1001 votes less than the votes secured by the disqualified candidates, which showed lack of confidence of majority of the voters in them Majority of the voters, in circumstances, could not be deprived of their right of franchise on the doctrine of thrown away ¬Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to hold fresh elections for the office of both Nazim as well as Naib Nazim of the concerned Union Council. Rashid Ahmad Rahmani v. Mirza Barkat Ali and 2 others PLD 1968 SC 301; Syed Saeed Hassan v. Pyar Ali and 7 others PLD 1976 SC 6; Junaid Ahmad Soomro v. Haji Mehboob Ali Bhayo and others PLD 1986 SC 698 and Mian Ahmad Saeed and others v. Election Tribunal…
🔒
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