2006 PLP 34 (CLC)
FIDA HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT RETURNING OFFICER, MULTAN and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 34 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | FIDA HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT RETURNING OFFICER, MULTAN and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Punjab Local Government Ordinance (XIII of 2001) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 34 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Local Government Ordinance (XIII of 2001) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 34 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 34 (CLC) (FIDA HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT RETURNING OFFICER, MULTAN and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Altaf Hussain Rawan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 152
Constitution. of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Election for reserved seat
Peasant
Nomination papers of petitioner were rejected by Returning Officer and District Returning Officer, on the ground that he had a holding of more than 5 acres of land during the period of five years preceding the election year
Plea raised by the petitioner was that he acquired land from his father and transferred the same to his wife prior to filing of his nomination papers
Irrespective of the fact as to how and when the land was acquired by petitioner, the fact remained that he was owner of more than 5 acres of land during the five years period before the election year
Petitioner did not qualify and his nomination papers were rightly rejected by the Courts below
Petition was dismissed in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.
The petitioner filed his nomination papers to contest for the special seat of Peasant, which have been rejected by the learned Returning Officer, on the ground that he had a holding of more than 5 acres of land, during the period of five years preceding the year in which, the elections are to be held. In this regard, the Returning Officer has taken notice that he admittedly vide registered deed dated 11-8-2005 has transferred 52 Kanals and 18 Marlas of his land to his wife; appeal filed by the petitioner has also been rejected on the same reasoning.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the land, which he had given to his wife, measuring 52 Kanals and 18 Marlas, was gifted by his father in his favour with an object further gift/transfer it in favour of his wife and that is exactly what he has done otherwise, he has holding of less than five acres of land.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and find that irrespective/notwithstanding as to how and when the land. was acquired but the fact remains that he was the owner of more than 5 acres during the five years period before the election year and this is an admitted position on the record, therefore, for all intents and purpose, the petitioner did not qualify and his nomination papers have been rightly rejected by the learned Courts below. No case for interference in the constitutional jurisdiction is made out. Dismissed. M.H./F-126/L????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.