1985 PLP 1877 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD LATIF Petitioner Versus THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1985 PLP 1877 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain and M.S.H. Quraishi, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD LATIF Petitioner Versus THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 1877 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 1877 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain and M.S.H. Quraishi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 1877 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD LATIF Petitioner Versus THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Wajid Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- M.A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 4th June, 1985.
- Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment of the High Court, dated 16-2-1985, passed in Writ Petition No. 649 of 1984).
Art. 185(3)--Punjab Local Councils (Election Petitions) Rules, 1979, Rr. 3, 4 & 5--Leave to appeal granted to consider whether Election Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider suo motu any ground not taken in petition before it.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents. Date of hearing: 4th June, 1985. ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑The facts giving rise to this petition are, briefly, that Muhammad Latif and Abdur Rahman contested the election for seat of a union council in District Sialkot. Muhammad Latif secured 220 votes as against 102 votes obtained by Abdur Rehman and was declared successful. Abdur Rehman challenged his election before the Election Tribunal, Sialkot, alleging that the list of voters which was made the basis of election was illegal. Issues were framed and evidence was led. The Election Tribunal, however, held that the aforementioned allegation could not be proved. But instead of dismissing the election petition the learned Election Tribunal, suo motu, took into consideration the fact that the polling staff had entered the Identity Card Numbers of each and every voter on their ballots, thus, infringing; the provisions of rule 29 of the Election Rules, 1979, relating to secrecy of ballots.' The Election Tribunal, therefore, declared the election of Muhammad Latif void.
2. The contention raised by the petitioner's counsel before us is that the learned Election Tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to consider suo motu any ground not taken in the petition before it.
3. After hearing the petitioner's counsel and going through the impugned order as well as the relevant rules we feel that this question of law needs consideration. Leave is, therefore, granted for this purpose. Security in the sum of Rs.1,000.
4. To be argued on the same record with permission to file additional documents. M.I. Leave granted.