1999 PLP 1204 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD NAVEED AKHTAR — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence,
| Citation | 1999 PLP 1204 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD NAVEED AKHTAR — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 1204 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP 1204 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP 1204 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD NAVEED AKHTAR — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Choudhry Rasheed Ahmed for Petitioner.
- Suhail H.K. Rana for Respondent No.3.
- Sardar Muhammad Ishaque for Respondent No.4
Headnotes / Summary
Cantonment Board
Nomination paper was rejected by the Returning Officer on ground that candidate was not a voter in the constituency concerned-- Appellate Authority unequivocally stated in its parawise comments that candidate was a registered voter of the concerned ward according to the voters 'list
Held, voters' list could not be disbelieved in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Choudhry Rasheed Ahmed for Petitioner. Suhail H.K. Rana for Respondent No.3. Sardar Muhammad Ishaque for Respondent No.4 This has become redundant,
2. The petitioner challenges the acceptance of the nomination paper of the respondent No.4 for the election to one of the seats of Cantonment Board, Faisal to be held on 30--5-1998, on the ground that the said respondent is not a voter in the constituency concerned i.e. Ward No.5 and, therefore, not eligible to contest in the elections. In support of the contention reference was made by the learned counsel for the petitioner to the voters list filed alongwith the petitioner. It was submitted that on this ground fourth respondent's nomination paper was rejected by the Returning Officer but on appeal the President, Cantonment Board, Faisal allowed him to contest in the elections. The learned counsel appearing for the private respondent No.4 as also that for the official respondents denied the allegation that the private respondent is not a voter in the constituency. In this regard they relied on the voters list which according to them pertained to the same constituency and in which the name of the said respondent appeared. Apart from the name of the respondent No.4 appearing in the voter list, the official respondent No.3 in this parawise comments has unequivocally stated that the respondent No.4 is a registered voter of the concerned Wards of Faisal Cantonment. There is no reason to disbelieve the voters list produced by the fourth respondent and the statement of the official respondent on the factual aspect of the controversy. We accordingly find no merit in this petition, which we dismiss in limine. On 29-5-1998, after hearing the learned counsel, we had dismissed this petition by a short order. Above are the reasons for such dismissal.
3. This has become infructuous and is dismissed. C.M.A./M-342/K Petition dismissed.