' MUHAMMAD JEHANGIR ARSHAD, J.---This Constitutional Petition has been filed to seek annulment of order, dated 26-4-2006 passed by learned Election Tribunal/respondent No,1 directing recounting of votes regarding election for the seat of General Councillor U.C. No,113, Jalalpur Pirwala, Multan.
2. The facts in brief are that Ghulam Haider contesting respondent No,2 filed Election Petition before the learned Election Tribunal in respect of the abovementioned election. The petitioner being the returnedcandidate filed contesting written statement to the Election Petition, whereas, remaining respondents filed consenting replies. It appears that Ghulam Haider present respondent No:2 during the pendency of said Election Petition requested the Election Tribunal for decision of the Election Petition in terms of recounting of votes at Polling Station Nos.113/7 and 113/10. The Election Tribunal however, vide order, dated 15-3-2006 dismissed the said application by holding:-- "On careful consideration of arguments and perusal of material available on the file it is found that petitioner has challenged the count of polling stations Nos.10 and 6 on the ground of mala fide, malpractice' and connivance between the Presiding Officer and the returned candidates particularly respondent No,4. According to rulings referred by respondent No,4 recounting cannot be ordered at this stage before recording the evidence, for recounting it is necessary that petitioners make out a case for recounting by establishing malpractice and mala fide on the part of the Presiding Officer and 'his rival contesting candidate. At present there is no such material.
Therefore, the prayer made by the petitioner cannot be accepted. Consequently, the prayer is turned down. File to come up for framing of issues on 22-3-2006."
' On 22-3-2006 again prayer was made by Ghulam Haider election petitioner through his counsel Mirza Umar Draz Baig, Advocate that petitioner did not want to lead any evidence and the matter be decided after recounting of votes of Polling Stations Nos.113/7 and 113/10 and on the basis of said statement the same Election Tribunal (Mian Altaf Hussan Mahar, Additional District Judge, Mianchannu) vide order, dated 27-4-2006 proceeded to direct recounting of votes of Polling Stations Nos.113/7 and 113/10 holding that said prayer being in accordance with law, was therefore, allowed. Hence, this Writ Petition.
3. At the very outset I have no hesitation in holding that the order of learned Election Tribunal, dated 27-4-2006 prima facie smacks of foul-play on the part of the Election Tribunal who without going into the law passed that order which in fact amounted to reviewing its earlier order, dated 15-3- 2006 clearly holding that "recounting cannot be ordered at this stage before recording the evidence, for recounting it is A necessary that petitioners makes out a case for recounting by establishing malpractice and mala fide on the part of the Presiding Officer and his rival contesting candidates. At present there is no such material, therefore, the prayer made by the petitioner cannot be accepted." I fail to understand as to what such material was made available to the Election Tribunal on 27-4-2006 so as to hold that "From the facts it is found that it is a simple case of recounting and the petition can be finally disposedof if recounting of the votes polled at Polling Stations Nos. 113/7 and 113/10 is carried out". This order, dated 27-4-2006 in fact amounts to reviewing the earlier order, dated 15-3-2006 and it is an established principle of law that power of review being a statutory right cannot be exercised unless available under the law governing the proceedings, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case "Muzaffar Ali v.
Muhammad Shafi" (PLD 1981 SC 94), "Hussain Bakhsh v. Settlement Commissioner, Rawalpindi and others" (PLD 1970 SC 1) and "Muhammad Khan Junejo v. Fida Hussain Dero and others" (PLD 2004 SC 452), whereas no such power is available either under the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 2002 or Punjab Local Councils Elections Rules, 2005 and on this score alone the impugned order, dated 27-4-2006 passed by Election Tribunal cannot sustain and on acceptance of this Writ Petition the same is declared as without lawful authority and of legal effect.
4. Copy of this order be immediately remitted to the concerned Election Tribunal for his perusal and consideration, with warning to be careful in future, otherwise, if such like complaint showing either negligently proceeding with the trial or acting in ignorance of law is brought to the notice of this Court, a serious view of the same would be taken.