MUHAMMAD NASEER AHMAD vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE and others
This constitutional petition challenges an order dated 16th December 1998, passed by an Election Tribunal, which directed a recount of votes in an election petition filed by respondent No. 2 against the petitioner, a returned candidate. The petitioner sought a recount encompassing all candidates, not merely specific ones. The respondent raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the petition, citing the petitioner's prior unsuccessful writ petition and the suppression of material facts. Upon review, the Court observed that the impugned order was merely an interim procedural step scheduling the matter for arguments on objections, rather than a final adjudication. The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable against such an interim order. The Court emphasized that the legislative intent behind election laws does not provide for appeals against interim orders, and allowing constitutional petitions against such interlocutory proceedings would frustrate the expeditious resolution of election disputes. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, affirming that the spirit of the law discourages judicial interference in pending interim election tribunal proceedings.
- Is a constitutional petition maintainable against an interim order passed by an Election Tribunal?
- Does the suppression of facts in a prior writ petition bar the maintainability of a subsequent petition?
- Can a court interfere with an interim procedural order of an Election Tribunal under its writ jurisdiction?
- Article 199, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
The writ petition is directed against order, dated 16th of December, 1998, whereby recounting has been ordered in the election petition filed by the respondent No,2 against the petitioner, who is the returned candidate. It is argued that the petitioner has no objection to the recount but that should be in respect of all the candidates including the petitioner.
2. On the other hand, the learned Addl. A.-G. has pointed out that the petitioner earlier filed Writ Petition No,24348 of 1998 which was dismissed by this Court vide order, dated 27th of November, 1998. It is added that this was directed against order, dated 20th of November, 1998. This way the petitioner is guilty of suppression of facts and second petition cannot be maintained.
3. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments and gone through the record. The Tribunal vide order, dated 9th of December, 1998, impugned in this petition, posted the matter for hearing the arguments on the objections raised, therefore, it is no order. This remains an interim order and the Legislature in its own wisdom has not provided an appeal against such order. The spirit of law cannot be allowed to be repeated by entertaining Constitutional petitions against the interim orders because if that is done, it would be difficult to decide any petition.
4. In this view of the matter this petition is dismissed.
Cited by 4 cases
- RASHIDA YAQOOB Versus ELECTION TRIBUNAL 2017 CLCN 17
- MUHAMMAD IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHRY vs MUMTAZ AHMED TARAR and 16 2014 PLD Lahore 651
- Muhammad Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhary vs Mumtaz Ahmad Tarar, etc. 2014 C.L.R. 693
- Muhammad ljaz Ahmad Chaudhary vs Punjab Election Tribunal, Lahore, etc 2014 C.L.R. 775