Law: Punjab Local Government Election Rules 2005

Section: 67(2)(i)

Law: Punjab Local Government Election Rules 2005

Section: 67(2)(i)

Punjab Local Government Elections Rules, 2005-------Rr. 65 & 67(2)(i)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Election of Nazim and Naib Nazim---Petitioners who contested the election of Nazim and Naib'Nazim for Union Council concerned, were declared successful, and a notification was accordingly issued---Respondents challenged the validity of said election by filing an election petition and prayed that they be declared as returned candidates---Election Tribunal accepted said election petition filed by the respondents, disqualified the petitioners and also declared the respondents as elected Nazim and. Naib Nazim of the constituency---Validity---Preponderance of evidence had established that the petitioners/returned candidates did not declare their correct assets---Evidence of record keeper of Excise and Taxation Department was sufficient in that respect---Election of the petitioners/returned candidates, in circumstances, was rightly nullified by the Election Tribunal and that order of the Election Tribunal warranted no interference---Exercise of power as contained in R.67(2)(i) of Punjab Local Government Elections Rules, 2005, declaring the respondents/returned candidates as elected Nazim and Naib Nazim had not been properly exercised---Sine qua non for declaration in terms of S.67(2)(i) of Punjab Local Government Elections Rules, 2005, was that same should be established by positive, incontrovertible and direct evidence that the disqualification was notorious---Evidence of high quality should have been produced in that respect by the respondents---Perusal of evidence tendered and deposition made as contained in the contents of the impugned order did not reach that benchmark---No credible or even tangible evidence was produced to establish that disqualification of the petitioners was notorious---Distinction in that context had to be clearly drawn---Concealment of assets and the doctrine of throw away votes were distinguishable acts and were required to be proved independently---In the present case said most important aspect was neither considered nor discussed---While deciding that question, Election Tribunal did neither…

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