LAHORE: LHC sets aside proceedings of recall motion
By Correspondent
LAHORE, July 19: The Lahore High Court on Monday set aside the proceedings of a recall motion against Sardar Adil Umar as Nazim of Iqbal Town holding that the motion suffered from legal infirmity.
Accepting the writ petition of the town Nazim, Chief Justice Iftikhar Husain Chaudhry held that the motion was neither served on the Nazim nor the town municipal officer was aware of any such move. The session which reportedly voted the Nazim out, was not attended by the person who was to be proceeded against.
Two Naib Nazims, Rana Faryad Ali and Faiz Rasool, the proposer and seconder of the motion, submitted through Advocate Azam Nazir Tarar that they would like to move another recall motion against the Nazim removing all the legal anomalies.
The court maintained it was allowed if it met all the requirements as provided by the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 2001. Petitioner Adil Umar submitted that the recall motion was passed on July 7 without his information and without a proper session for the vote.
He submitted that he had never received such a motion and it was through newspaper reports that he came to know about the passage of the motion the next morning.
His counsel Ahsan Bhoon submitted that his client came to know through news reports that 20 members of the town council had passed a no-confidence move against him at a session whose minutes were not recorded and which was not previously notified.
He submitted that the Punjab Local Government Ordinance has laid down a comprehensive procedure for a recall motion to be voted upon. Not even a single legal condition was met, he submitted.
He stated that on a question by the Nazim, the tehsil municipal officer (TMO), who was supposed to record minutes of all meetings under the law, informed him that he had not recorded minutes of the session where a recall motion against him was voted upon.
Similarly, the TMO expressed his ignorance regarding the receipt a motion or the convening of a session whose agenda included the vote over such a motion. The petitioner contended that town Naib Nazim Mian Javed Ali fabricated minutes of a fictitious meeting which was never held.
The proceedings of the fictitious meeting showed that a motion of no-confidence was received and was voted upon. According to the petitioner, it was the Naib Nazim who wrote to the secretary of the Election Commission, Punjab, to make arrangements for a by-election to fill in the vacancy created by the ouster of the Nazim.
Advocate Bhoon submitted that the recall motion did not mention even the date of presentation and a session convened for a vote. He submitted that no motion was given to the Nazim nor was he informed about a session as was required under the law. The petitioner submitted that some of the persons who stood disqualified as members, were present at the illegal session where the motion was debated and voted upon.
