|
|
|
| December 27, 2005 | Tuesday | Ziqa’ad 24, 1426 |
Petitions against re-polling dismissed
PESHAWAR, Dec 26: The Peshawar High Court on Monday dismissed two writ petitions challenging re-polling at two female and a male polling stations in a union council of Nowshera district.
The petitions were filed by Mian Raheem Shah, a candidate who was initially declared nazim of union council Ziarat Kakasahib.
A few days after the local government elections the district returning officer on the directives of the Election Commission of Pakistan ordered re-polling at three polling stations.
The petitioner had challenged the said order of the DRO in one of the petitions. In the second petition he had requested the high court to permit him for contesting the polls of district naib-nazim scheduled for Dec 28.
A two-member bench comprising Justice Ijazul Hassan and Justice Fazalur Rehman had heard arguments of both the parties and reserved its order few days ago. A single bench comprising Justice Mohammad Raza Khan pronounced the order of the division bench on Monday.
Advocates Qazi Mohammad Anwer and Ms Mussarat Hilali appeared for the petitioner Mian Rahim Shah, whereas Iftikhar Hussain Gillani represented the rival candidate Jamsheduddin Khan.
The petitioner stated that the Chief Election Commissioner had ordered the DRO to decide an application sent to the commissioner by the losing candidate Jamsheduddin complaining that women were barred from casting votes.
He claimed that women had participated in the electoral process and also cast votes in the said two polling stations.
He contended that the DRO had overstepped his jurisdiction and once the names of the returned candidates were notified by the government the matter could only be raised before an election tribunal constituted after the polls.
The petitioner stated that Rule 25 of the NWFP Local Government Elections Rules, 2005, stated that the presiding officer of a polling station had the powers to stop polling at a station and inform the returning officer if the poll was at any time interrupted or obstructed for reason beyond the control of the presiding officer; and, if any ballot box was unlawfully taken out of the custody of the presiding officer, or is accidentally or intentionally destroyed or lost.
|
|
|
|
