P L D 1966 (W (PLP)
GHULAM RASOOL‑Petitioner Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND ELECTION
| Citation | P L D 1966 (W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Inamullah and Wahiduddin Ahmad, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM RASOOL‑Petitioner Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND ELECTION |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1966 (W (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1966 (W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Inamullah and Wahiduddin Ahmad, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1966 (W (PLP) (GHULAM RASOOL‑Petitioner Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND ELECTION). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Sh. Mir Muhammad for Petitioner.
- Abdul Hayee Qureshi, A. A.‑G. for Respondent No. 1.
- A. K. Chandnani for Respondent No. 2.
- Date of hearing : 3rd June 1965.
Headnotes / Summary
Electoral College Act (IV of 1964)
Ss. 23(3), proviso (iii), 8(1)(a) & 58‑Electoral Roll‑Validity of entries ‑ Election Tribunal not competent to go behind‑Correctness of entry in Electoral Roll respecting‑ age of voter filing nomination paper of candidate ‑ Cannot be challenged before Election Tribunal. Writ Petition No. 27.8 of 1965, decided on 30th June 1965 (unreported) ref.
Judgment & Decree
INAMULLAH, J.‑
This is a petition under Article 98 of the Constitution. The petitioner and the Respondent No. 2 con tested election to the Electoral College from Electoral Unit No.
618. Union Council That, Taluka Sakrand, District Nawabshah. The petitioner was declared elected: The Respondent No. 2, however, filed an election petition which was allowed on the ground that the nomination paper of the petitioner was filed by a voter who was less than 21 years of age. In other words, the voter was not qualified to be enrolled on the electoral roll of the said Unit. We have already held today in Writ Petition No. 278 of 1965 that the electoral roll was final as to the requisite entries made therein and the Election Tribunal could not go behind it. In that view of the matter the Election Tribunal could not hold that the voter who subscribed to the nomination A of the petitioner was less than 21 years of age. We would, for the reasons that we have given in Writ Petition No. 278 of 1965, allow the petition and set aside the order of the Election Tribunal dated the 29th April 1965, and hold that the petitioner continues to be a member of the Electoral College from the said Unit. We make no order as to costs. K.B.A. Petition accepted.