1993 PLP 2471 (MLD)

‑‑‑‑S.14‑‑‑Nomination papers‑‑‑Rejection of‑‑‑Nomination papers of candidate were rejected by Returning, Officer for not appending to nomination papers copies of electoral roll , hearing entry of candidate as a voter, and copies of electoral rolls bearing ‑y names of proposer and seconder as voters‑‑‑No legation was made that candidate, his proposer or his seconder were not registered voters ‑‑‑Defects on basis o which nomination papers were rejected were not of substantial] nature and same should have been allowed to be remedied ‑‑‑Factual aspects of entries of candidate, his proposer and seconder as voters having not been questioned, Returning Officer should have allowed time to candidate to submit certified copies of such electoral rolls‑‑‑‑Order rejecting nomination papers of candidate having not been based on valid ground and understanding was set aside. Rana Ijaz Ahmad Khan for Appellant. Maqsood Ahmad Ahlmad for Respondent. Date of hearing; 12th Septeniber,1993. SARDAR MUHAMMAD DOGAR, J.‑‑‑The nomination papers of the appellant for PP‑123Z Lahore‑17 were rejected by the Returning Officer of the constituency vide I Order dated 1‑9‑1993 on the ground that neither the certified copy of the electoral roll bearing the entry of the appellant as a voter nor the copies of the , electoral rolls bearing the names of the proposer and seconder as voters were appended with the nomination papers. Neither it was alleged nor was it written that the appellant, his proposer or his seconder were not registered voters.

2. Although the I provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1976 provide that copies of the electoral rolls of the candidate, proposer and seconder will be appended with the nomination papers but it has been provided in proviso (ii) of sub‑clause (c) of subsection (3) of section 14 of the Act, that nomination papers shall not be rejected on the ground of any defect, which was not of a substantial nature. It is also provided that the defect of such a nature shall be allowed to be remedied. Since the factual aspects of the entries of the candidate, his proposer and seconder as voters were not questioned, the Returning Officer ought to have allowed time to the appellant' to submit the certified copies of the electoral rolls. In the circumstances, the rejection of the nomination papers of the appellant was not based on valid ground and understanding. Apart from that the appellant has now appended the certified copies of the requisite documents. The appeal is, therefore, allowed. The nomination papers of the appellant shall be deemed to have been accepted. H.B.T./87/E Appeal allowed.