' GUL MUHAMMAD KHAN, J.-The petitioner challenges through this petition the order dated 1-10-1980, passed by the Additional Commissioner (Revenue) as Election Tribunal, Sargodha. He had accepted the petition filed by the respondent Muhammad Younas Beg, and set aside the election in which the present petitioner had been elected as Chairman, Union Council No, 75, Shaheenabad Tehsil and District Sargodha.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel that the Tribunal did not consider the lease of the parties inasmuch as that he neither discussed the evidence brought on the record nor, the arguments.
3. We have gone through the order to find that the Tribunal has relied on his judgment in the case of the election of Vice-Chairman. The evidence as well as the minutes, of the election of the Chairman, were, however, quite different and distinct. The respondent had produced three witnesses in support, viz. Abdul Aziz P. W. 1, Muhammad Hussain P. W. 2, and respondent as P. W.
3. His case was that though the parties had secured equal number of votes in election, yet the Presiding Officer in collusion with the Secretary wrote the name of the present petitioner o both the slips which were used for drawing the lot. The Tribunal had before him also the statement of the Presiding Officer as well as the Secretary. In the circumstances, it was his duty under law to have considered the entire material before him separately and independently of the petition with regard to the Office of the Vice-Chairman. He manifestly failed to perform that duty. We are, therefore, constrained to hold his order to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect. This petition is consequently accepted and the case sent back to another Tribunal who is said to be functioning in the same District, for a decision in accordance with law, on the same record within one month of the date when a copy of the order is produced by the parties. There will be no order as to costs.