MUHAMMAD AFZAL Versus MIR MEHRULLAH KHAN
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑ The dispute in this petition relates to the election to the office of Chairman of District Council, Sibi. The members of the District Council took oath of office on 26‑12‑1987. Under Rule 4, Baluchistan Local Councils (Election of Chairman) Rules, 1979, the election to the office of the Chairman should have been held ordinarily on that very day. However, the election was not held on that day and the Presiding Officer adjourned the proceedings without fixing a date for the next meeting. On 30‑12‑1987 at 1‑00 p.m. the Deputy Commissioner, Sibi, acting as Returning Officer issued a notice calling upon the members of the District Council to meet on 31‑12‑1987 at 1‑00 p.m. to elect the Chairman. In accordance with this notice a meeting was held in his office on the appointed day. It was attended by 10 out of 16 members. The petitioner was unanimously elected as Chairman.
2. Mir Mehrullah Khan who was one of the members of the District Council filed a writ petition on 13‑1‑1988 in the Baluchistan High Court challenging the election on a number of grounds. A Division Bench in the High Court found that there was no proper notice served upon the members before the election was held. In this context, it observed:‑----
"When this was pointed out, the learned Advocate‑General as well as the learned counsel for the respondent No.3 failed to produce any notice which was served upon the petitioner. Furthermore, taking into consideration the circumstances under which the election was held, it becomes doubtful that the learned Returning Officer acted in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance or Rules. According to the Affidavit of Ghulam Qadir P.A. to the Returning Officer, he contacted on telephone and informed the petitioner about the date of hearing on 31st December 1987 at 11‑45 a.m. The meeting had to be held on the same date at 1‑00 p.m. This indicates that mandatory provisions of section 156 and relevant rule were not adhered to by respondent No.2. The election as held) thus was not conducted according to law."
Accordingly, the High Court accepted the writ petition and declared the election proceedings held on 31‑12‑1987 to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
3. After hearing the learned counsel we are not persuaded that the view taken by the learned Judges in the High Court 'suffers from any infirmity. Apart from the reasons given by the High Court in support of its decision we are of the opinion that the notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner was so short that it cast doubt on the fairness of the election. In the circumstances, we do not think that it is a fit case for interference by this Court. Leave is refused.
M . B . A . / M‑581 /S Petition dismissed.