2000SCMR712 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD LATIF MUGHAL — Petitioner Versus THE ELECTION TRIBUNAL, PUNJAB, LAHORE — Respondent
| Citation | 2000SCMR712 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Irshad Hasan Khan, Raja Afrasiab Khan |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD LATIF MUGHAL — Petitioner Versus THE ELECTION TRIBUNAL, PUNJAB, LAHORE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000SCMR712 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000SCMR712 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Irshad Hasan Khan, Raja Afrasiab Khan.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000SCMR712 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD LATIF MUGHAL — Petitioner Versus THE ELECTION TRIBUNAL, PUNJAB, LAHORE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Khan A. Hamid, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Maqbool Ilahi Malik, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Mahmood-ul-Islam, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
S.14(3)
Person himself being not a candidate in election could not file appeal against the order of the Returning Officer in terms of S.14(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1976.
Judgment & Decree
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 25-9-1997 passed in Writ Petition No.503 of 1997 allowing the same against order of the Election Tribunal, dated 7-1-1997 by Full Bench of the Lahore High Court, Lahore.
2. Brief facts are that respondent No.3 filed nomination form 1 for contesting election from PP-127 which was accompanied by a declaration of oath and statement of assets. As he allegedly did not pay income-tax or wealth tax as per assets shown in his nomination form, the petitioner herein as a voter of his constituency raised an objection in writing to his candidature before the Returning Officer, which was overruled in consequence, the petitioner approached the Election Tribunal, whereupon the order of the Returning Officer was set aside and nomination papers of respondent No.3 were rejected vide order, dated 7-1-1997. Being aggrieved the respondent No.3 filed a Constitution petition W.P. No.503 of 1997 before the Lahore High Court, Lahore which was allowed on the ground that the petitioner being not a candidate, could not file an appeal against the order of the Returning Officer in terms of section 14(3) of Representation of People Act, 1976.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned judgment we do not find any legal defect in the well-reasoned judgment of the High Court, warranting interference.
4. Resultantly the petition is dismissed and leave declined. M.B.A./M-403/S Petition dismissed.