1998 PLP 318 (MLD)
IMRAN KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1998 PLP 318 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | IMRAN KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (a) Representation of the People Act (LXXXV of 1976), (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 318 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Representation of the People Act (LXXXV of 1976), (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 318 (MLD)?
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: 1998 PLP 318 (MLD) (IMRAN KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ghulam Sabir for Petitioners.
- Shahzad Jahangir Attorney-General for Pakistan and Kh. Saeed-uz -Zafar, Deputy Attorney-General for Pakistan for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 13
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199
Constitutional petition-- Rejection of nomination papers of candidates
Nomination papers were rejected on the ground that they were not presented within time on last date for filing of nomination papers given by Election Commission
Nomination of such petitioners were accepted under interim orders passed by High Court subject to final decision of Constitutional petitions
Nomination papers of petitioners having already been accepted by Returning Officers though under interim order passed by High Court, it would be in the interest of justice that petitioners be provided opportunity to place their point of view before respective Returning Officers and to demonstrate before them that in law papers should be deemed to have been presented within time or that petitioners were under no obligation to present the same within time mentioned in public notice in absence of its publication and such papers could be presented till 12-00 mid-night-- Returning Officers were required to act strictly in accordance with law uninfluenced by any other considerations.
Art. 199
Representation of the People Act (LXXXV of 1976) S. 14(5)-- Constitutional petition
Person aggrieved of the order of Returning Officer could file appeal under S. 14(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1976
Such remedy was more efficacious than petition under Art. 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973).
Judgment & Decree
Ghulam Sabir for Petitioners. Shahzad Jahangir Attorney-General for Pakistan and Kh. Saeed-uz -Zafar, Deputy Attorney-General for Pakistan for Respondents. This order shall dispose of Writ Petitions Nos.23721, 23917, 23893, 23965, 23985, 23966, 23936. 23947, 24015, 23867, 23963, 23894, 23882, 23914, 23682, 23959, 23877, 23796, 23967, 23976, 23968, 23990, 23978, 23991, 23992, 23915 and 23916 of 1996 as these petitions arise under similar circumstances.
2. In all these petitions, the petitioners have made a grievance that their nomination papers had not been entertained by the respective Returning Officer, though they had presented the same on the last day namely 21-12-1996.
3. In some cases, it has been argued 'y the learned counsel for the petitioners that the candidates or their agents were present inside the premises of the Courts before 3 p.m. but the Returning Officers at the stroke of 3'O Clock refused to receive any further nomination papers.
4. In some other cases, it has been stated that on account of rush, the candidates or their agents were prevented from entering the Court room within the prescribed time.
5. In certain other cases, the averment made is that the time specified by the Returning Officers for accepting the nomination papers was not made known to the public and the candidates were not aware that 3 p.m. had been fixed to be the last hour by which the nomination papers were to be accepted.
6. When these petitions came up for hearing on 21-12-1996 and 22-12-1996, under interim orders passed by this Court, nomination papers of the candidates were accepted by the Returning Officers subject to final decision of these petitions.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as also Mr. Shahzad Jahangir, learned Attorney-General for Pakistan and Kh. Saeed-uz-Zafar, learned Deputy Attorney-General for Pakistan. It is true that in the schedule published by Election Commission of Pakistan, no time has been specified for the receipt of nomination papers but there is no law which requires the Election Commission of Pakistan to specify the time in the schedule itself. On the other hand, under section 13(4) of the Representation of People Act, 1976, it is the obligation of the Returning Officers to issue a public notice specifying the place and time during which the nomination papers shall be received. According to the respondents, public notices were issued by the respective Returning Officers, though this fact is vehemently denied by the learned counsel for the petitioners who have stated that no publication of notice was made in the manner as required by law.
8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I feel it unnecessary to decide any of the questions raised in these petitions at this stage. As the nomination papers of the candidates/petitioners have already been accepted by the Returning Officers, though under the interim orders passed by this Court, in my view it would be in the interest of justice that the candidates be provided an opportunity to place their point of view before the respective Returning Officers and to demonstrate before them that in law the papers should be deemed to have been presented within the time or that the petitioners were under no obligation to present the same within the time mentioned in the public notice in the absence of its publication and such papers could be presented till 12.00 midnight. Similarly, as to what would be the effect if a candidate or his agent was inside the Court room or the premises has not been able to present the nomination papers should also in the first instance be examined by the Returning Officers. If any person is aggrieved of the order of the Returning Officers, he can file an appeal under section 14(5) of the Representation of People Act, 1976 which is to be heard at-least by a Division Bench of this Court. That remedy is more efficacious than these petitions. In view of the above, all these petitions are disposed of with a direction to the Returning Officers to allow an opportunity to the candidates, whose nomination papers have been accepted under the interim orders passed by this Court, to demonstrate that the presentation of nomination papers should be deemed within time. Needless to say that the Returning Officers are required to act strictly in accordance with law uninfluenced by any other considerations. A copy of this order shall be circulated to all the Returning Officers by the O.S.D. (Judicial) of this Court. A.A./I-33/L Writ Petitions disposed of.