MUHAMMAD ASLAM vs ELECTION TRIBUNAL And Other
The petitioner challenged the dismissal of his election petition regarding an election to a Municipal Committee. He contended that the successful respondent's nomination paper was invalid because the respondent was not present in Gujrat on the filing day and his agent was a minor. The Election Tribunal and subsequently the Lahore High Court in constitutional jurisdiction dismissed his claims, holding that any irregularity in appointing an agent that did not materially affect the result could not disenfranchise voters, and that the nomination papers validly filed by the proposer were in order. Upon a petition for leave to appeal, the Supreme Court held that the High Court's judgment was in full accord with well-settled principles of law, as there was no illegality or lack of jurisdiction by the Tribunal. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed.
- Does the absence of a candidate from the municipality on the day of filing nomination papers invalidate the nomination?
- Whether the appointment of a minor as an agent invalidates election nomination papers when the papers are duly proposed, seconded, and accepted?
- Can constitutional jurisdiction be invoked against the decision of an Election Tribunal in the absence of illegality or lack of jurisdiction?
ORDER
1. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--Petitioner unsuccessfully contested election as a member of Municipal Committee from Electoral Unit No. 6, Gujrat, securing 759 votes as against 866 secured by respondent No. 2. He challenged respondent's election on the ground that respondent not being present in Gujrat on the day fixed for the filing of nomination papers, the presentation of his nomination paper was invalid, and his Agent being a minor was disqualified from being appointed.
2. Both these pleas did not find favour with Election Tribunal and his election petition was dismissed.
3. Petitioner then challenged the order of the Election Tribunal in a Constitution Petition in Lahore High Court but this to was dismissed by the judgment dated17-3-1984 for the reasons which may be usefully reproduced hereunder:- "The contentions have no force. Any irregularity in the appointment of an agent which not materially affected the result as found by the learned Election Tribunal, cannot have the effect of disfranchising the voters. The fact that the respondent No. 2 was in Karachi on the day the nomination papers were filed, does not invalidate the nomination papers which were probably filed by the proposer before the Returning Officer and the nomination having been duly proposed, seconded and accepted by the candidate, was perfectly in order. The petitioner has lost by more than 100 votes. His grievances have been tried by a competent Court of exclusive jurisdiction, the Election Tribunal. There is no illegality or lack of jurisdiction to call for interference in constitutional jurisdiction. This petition is, therefore, dismissed in limine."
4. After having heard the learned counsel in support of this petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of the High Court in the light of the submissions made by him which are bare repetitions of those that were urged, before the High Court. We are early of the view that the judgment of the High Court is full accord with the well-settled principle of law and interference by this Court will not be justified.
5. The petition is dismissed.