2002 PLP 1995 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD TARIQ ZAKHMI and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus ELECTION TRIBUNAL and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2002 PLP 1995 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Abdul Hameed Dogar and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD TARIQ ZAKHMI and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus ELECTION TRIBUNAL and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Punjab Local Government Elections Rules, 2000‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 1995 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Local Government Elections Rules, 2000‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 1995 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Abdul Hameed Dogar and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 1995 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD TARIQ ZAKHMI and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus ELECTION TRIBUNAL and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Naseer Ahmed Bhutta, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents
- Date of hearing: 18th April, 2002
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 31‑1‑2002 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No. 19911 of 2001). ‑‑‑‑R.81‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Election petition‑‑ Recounting of ballet papers‑‑‑Jurisdiction of Election Tribunal‑‑‑Petitioner was declared returned candidate but election petition filed by the respondent was accepted by the Election Tribunal on the basis of recounting of votes‑‑ Respondent was declared successful as 706 valid votes were cast in his favour against the petitioner who secured 687 votes‑‑‑Order of the Election Tribunal was assailed in Constitutional petition but High Court declined to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal‑‑‑Contention of the petitioner was that neither the votes cast on the constituency could be recounted by the Election Tribunal, nor any election petition could be filed beyond the scope of the R.81 of the Punjab Local Government Elections Rules, 2000‑‑ Validity‑‑‑High Court in the judgment had rightly refused to interfere with the recount of the votes and subsequent declaration of the respondent as returned candidate‑‑‑Where substantial justice had been done between the parties, no case for interference with the judgment passed by High Court had been made out‑‑‑Supreme Court declined to interference with the judgment passed by High Court‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.‑‑‑The petitioners seek leave to appeal from order dated 31‑1‑2002 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No. 19911 of 2001.
2. The petitioners and respondents Nos.3 and 4 contested the election of Nazim/Naib Nazim of Union Council 43/7, District Gujranwala. The petitioners were notified by the District' Returning Officer as returned candidates for Nazim and Naib Nazim for the said Union Councils. The respondents Nos.3 and 4 filed election petition which was accepted as a result of recounting, by the Election Tribunal, of the ballet papers cast in favour of the respective parties. Consequently, they were declared as Nazim and Naib Nazim. The petitioners, filed Writ. Petition No. 19911 of 2001 which was dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 31‑1‑2002.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that neither the votes cast in the constituency could be recounted by the Election Tribunal nor any election petition could be filed beyond the scope of rule 81 of the Punjab Local Government Election Rules, 2000. It was further argued that no objection was taken before the ' Presiding Officer, on behalf of the respondents as to the double stamped ballet papers which were cast and counted in favour of the petitioners at the relevant time.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at length. As a result of the recount, by the Election Tribunal, of the ballet papers cast in the Constituency the respondents were found to have bagged 706 valid votes as against the petitioners who secured 687 votes. In these circumstances, the Lahore High Court by the impugned judgment rightly refused to interfere with the recount of the votes and subsequent declaration of the respondents as returned candidates. The substantial justice having been done between the parties, no case for interference with the impugned judgment by this Court has been made out by the learned counsel for the petitioners. No exception can be taken to the impugned judgment in the facts and circumstances of the case.
5. Resultantly, this petition for leave to appeal has no merit and the same is dismissed accordingly. No order as to costs. Q.M.H/M.A.K./M‑402/S Petition dismissed.