Syed Shabir Hussain vs The District Returning Officer And Other
The petitioner challenged an order of the High Court declining relief against the deletion of his nomination papers for the election of Nazim and Naib Nazim from UC-24 Gujrat. Respondent No. 2 had applied to withdraw from the election on the ground that he had not filed or signed the nomination papers, which the Returning Officer accepted, thereby deleting both names since the Local Council Election Scheme requires candidates to contest as a pair. The core legal question was whether a candidate could withdraw unilaterally and whether a single remaining candidate could contest without a pair. The Supreme Court held that under the Local Council Election Scheme, if one candidate of a pair retires or withdraws, the remaining contestant cannot participate alone, justifying the Returning Officer's action and the High Court's dismissal. The key principle laid down is that election for the office of Nazim requires a complete pair, and the withdrawal or removal of one candidate invalidates the nomination of the pair.
- Can a candidate withdraw from a local council election without the consent of the other member of their contesting pair?
- Whether a remaining candidate can participate in the election alone after the withdrawal of the other member of the pair?
- Was the Returning Officer justified in deleting a candidate's name upon an application stating the nomination papers were not signed or filed by them?
ORDER
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J. Petitioner and respondent No. 2 filed nomination papers to contest election of Nazim and Naib Nazim respectively from UC-24 Gujrat. After scrutiny respondent No. 2 statedly filed an application before the Returning Officer praying for permission to withdraw from the election. Request so made was accordingly acceded to. The petitioner challenged such^ order before the High Court by filing writ petition without availing the remedy of appeal before District Judge as period for filing of appeal had already expired.
2. Learned counsel stated that respondent No. 2 can only withdraw nomination papers if petitioner gives his consent, otherwise he had to contest election. We are not in agreement with the contention of the petitioner because in this case the respondent had filed an application that he had not filed nomination papers or signed the same, therefore, in such view of the matter the Returning Officer was justified to delete the name of respondent from the election to the office of Nazim and Naib Nazim with the result that the name of the petitioner also stood deleted. According to the Local Council Election Scheme for the election of Nazim a pair is allowed tp contest election and if any one of them retired or withdrew from the election the remaining contestant cannot be allowed to participate in the election alone. Therefore, in such view of the matter the learned High Court was right in declining relief to the petitioner.
3. Thus for the foregoing reasons we see no merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave refused.