1. ' M. JAVED BUTTAR, J.--- We have heard learned counsel for the parties including Assistant Advocate-General at length and have also seen the available record. Assistance has also been rendered by Mr. Muhammad Shafiq, Secretary, Punjab Irrigation and Drainage Authority (PIDA). We have seen rule 16(2) of the Punjab Irrigation and Drainage Authority (Pilot Farmers Organizations)
2. Rules, 2005 which reads as under:-- "(2) All election disputes and disputes relating to the voter lists shall be decided by the Authority, a duly authorized Officer of the Authority or by a dispute resolution committee constituted by the Authority on the application of an aggrieved person."
3. Its plain reading shows that any body who may not be a candidate could raise the election dispute before the within mentioned authority or an Authorized Officer. ' ' Therefore, order, dated 11-12-2006 passed by the Chief Executive, Area Water Board/Superintending Engineer, Lower Chenab Canal, West Circle, Faisalabad, which was assailed by the private respondents before the Lahore High Court, Lahore, could have been treated as an order passed under the abovesaid Rule 16(2) of abovesaid Rules, reproduced above. In these circumstances, learned counsel representing the private respondents does not object to the remand of the cases to the High Court because there is no decision on merits.
2. In view of the above mentioned, both these petitions are converted into appeals and allowed, impugned order, dated 29-5-2007 passed by learned Judge in Chambers of Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Writ Petitions Nos.881 of 2007 and 882 of 2007 as well as the order, dated 12-6-2007 in R.As. Nos.48 of 2007 and 49 of 2007 are set aside, order, dated 11-12-2006 of the above mentioned Authority is declared to have been passed under Rule 16(2) of the abovesaid Rules. Writ petitions shall be deemed to be pending before the High Court for their decision on merits, expeditiously.
4. There is, however, no order as to costs.