LAHORE, May 23: Local council election petitions and the tribunals hearing them have no legal sanction behind them, a lawyer submitted before the Lahore High Court on Thursday.

Arguing against unseating of a Nazim by an election tribunal, who was presently restored by Justice Maulvi Anwarul Haq pending further proceedings, advocate Dr Mohyuddin Qazi said the elections were held under the Punjab Local Government Elections Ordinance, 2000, which was later replaced and repealed by a more comprehensive Local Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 2001. Neither of the two ordinances provided for electoral challenges through election petitions or the establishment of election tribunals for hearing them.

The 2001 ordinance, which substituted the exhaustive 1979 law on the subject, envisaged that the Nazims, Naib Nazims and councillors elected under the 2000 ordinance shall complete their tenure unless earlier removed by the chief election commissioner or recalled by their electors. Rules made under the 2000 ordinance sanctioned election petitions and tribunals but subordinate legislation could not travel beyond the provisions of the parent law. The rules were saved by the 2001 ordinance.

Focusing on the writ petition filed by him on behalf of Nazim Masood Husain of Union Council 72 of Kot Shakir, tehsil and district Jhang, the lawyer said the petitioner had been unseated because Naib Nazim Allah Dad, who jointly contested the election on his panel had been found to be ineligible.

According to a finding rendered by the Jhang election tribunal consisting of district and sessions judge Sher Zaheer Ahmad Khan, Allah Dad produced a fake matriculation certificate and being a non-matriculate, was not qualified to contest the election. Since the Nazim and the Naib Nazim contested the poll on the basis of joint candidacy the tribunal also unseated the Nazim. It declared the runner-up panel elected.

Without prejudice to his objection to the constitution and jurisdiction of the tribunal and maintainability of the election petition, Advocate Qazi said disqualification of Naib Nazim should not necessarily entail the removal of Naib Nazim and vice versa. A casual vacancy caused by death, removal, resignation or recall could not deprive the other member of the panel of his right to continue to hold the office he was elected to. Only the office which has fallen vacant shall be filled by re-election.

The runner-up panel, the lawyer said, could also not be declared elected because there were two other panels in the field and the votes polled by the successful panel might have gone to either or both of them.

Admitting the petition as a case of first impression, the court suspended the notifications unseating the petitioner Nazim because of his deputy’s ineligibility and inducting the rival panel into office.

VERIFICATION: In another case of first impression, Justice Anwarul Haq accepted Advocate Qazi’s plea that absence of attestation of verification on an election petition did not render it invalid.