' The writ petition in hand, namely, Writ Petition No, 346 of 1983/BWP and Writ Petition No, 347 of 1983/BWP and Writ Petition No, 351 of 1983/BWP, are directed against elections from two wards of Zilia Council, Bahawalnagar and one ward of Zilla Council, Rahimyar Khan. The plea raised in these Constitutional petitions is common, namely, that certain Polling Officers had allowed the casting of votes without satisfying themselves about the identity of the voters by requiring them to produce their National Identity Cards. It has also been represented that the Polling Officers in question had not mentioned the numbers of the Identity Cards of the voters on the counterfoils of their ballot- papers.
2. The three petitions have been separately made by Syed Zafar Ahmad Shah, Haji Niaz Ahmad and Rais Khuda Bakhsh, who have been defeated by Khawaja Noor Ahmad Chishti, Ghulam Abbas Khan and Hafeez Ahmad, respectively. The petitions are against the successful candidates and some others. This order shall dispose of all the writ petitions mentioned above.
3. The petitioners had prayed for interim reliefs in the nature of stay orders requiring the authorities concerned not to notify the election of the successful candidates till the disposal of the petitions.
When the petitions were presented, one of us (Muhammad Ilyas, J.) was on leave and so they were placed before the other (Muhammad Munir Khan, J.) who granted interim reliefs till today and also required Mr. Riaz-ud-Din Ahmad Khan, Advocate, who represents the Advocate-General, Puniab, to appear before the Division Bench today. Having got notice of the stay orders, two of the successful candidates, namely, Khawaja Noor Ahmad Chishti and Ghulam Abbas Khan also entered appearance through their counsel, while Hafeez Ahmad personally appeared before us.
4. Today, at the very outset, it was objected by learned counsel for successful candidates, hereinafter referred to as the respondents, that this Court cannot entertain the instant petitions in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction because the petitioners have another efficacious and adequate remedy available to them. They maintained that the Punjab Local Councils Election Authority, hereinafter referred to as the Election Authority, has the jurisdiction to look into the grievance voiced by the petitioners and grant suitable relief to them in the event of their success.
They relied on subsection (1) of section 17 of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979, hereinafter referred to as the said Ordinance, and the case reported as The Punjab Local Councils Election Authority, Lahore v. Malik Muhammad Aslam and another (1) to support their arguments.
5. On the contrary, it was urged by learned counsel for the petitioners that the Election Authority was concerned with the making of arrangements for the elections and that after the elections were over, it could not take cognizance of irregularities with regard to the holding of election. In this connection, they placed reliance on subsection (2) of section 17 of the said Ordinance. It was also submitted by them that the petitioners could not have recourse to the Election Tribunals because the election of the respondents has not been notified in the official Gazette as yet.
6. It was not disputed by learned counsel for the respondents that since the names of the respondents had not been published in the official Gazette they could not approach the Election Tribunals for redress. It was, however, asserted by them that it was precisely due to the inability of the petitioners to go before the Election Tribunal that the competency of the Election Authority to look into their grievance was not affected by the provisions of subsection (2) of section 17 of the said Ordinance.
7. Subsections (1) and (2) of section 17 of the said Ordinance are to the following effect : "17. Publication of list of validly nominated candida'es.-(1) The Returning Officer shall, soon after the scrutiny of nomination papers, prepare in Form VI, a list of candidates who have been validly nominated and affix it at some conspicuous place in his office.
(2) In case an appeal against rejection of a nomination paper has been accepted under rule 16, the Returning Officer shall revise the list of validly nominated candidates in accordance with the decision in appeal and shall publish the list so revised at some conspicuous place in his office."
8. The provisions of subsection (2) of section 17 were added with a view to ensuring that the matters which can be agitated before the Election Tribunal are not taken cognizance of by the Election Authority also. The question as to when the Election Authority ceases to have jurisdiction in regard to such matters was thoroughly examined by the Supreme Court in the cited case of The Punjab Local Councils Election Authority, Lahore, and it was ruled that a dispute with regard to irregularities in election can be raised before the Election Tribunal after the publication of its result in the official Gazette but before the result is so published, it is the duty of the Election Authority to look into such a dispute. Relevant observations of the Supreme Court reads as under : " It is true that in the terms in which section 17 (1) is couched all disputes and election irregularities could be dealt with thereunder,
(1) 1982 SCMR 1086 ' Moreover, section 24 of the Ordinance provided that 'no election shall be called in question except by an election petition'. Therefore, in order to clarify the kind of matters which can be enquired into by the Election Authority under subsection (1) and those matters which are to be enquired into by the Election Tribunals, subsection (2) of section 17 was added. This is evident from the terms of subsection (2) which provides that 'nothing contained in sub-section (1) shall be construed to mean [underlining is ours]. The use of the word 'construed' is clearly intended to clarify further that this provision is in the nature of a declaratory or a clarificatory provision, whereby the law maker has interpreted subsection (1) of section 17, so as to ensure that the Election Authority remains on the right paths. Irregularities, violation of the law and other election, malpractices imparing the honesty and fairness of the elections could be corrected by the Election Authority under subsection
(1) of section 17 but as the law also provided for calling in question an election by an election petition, those matters which could be questioned by any election petition were debarred from the jurisdiction of the Election Authority. However, an election petition can be presented after the publication of the result in the official Gazette but as the Election Authority is charged with the duty of seeing that an election is held honestly justly and fairly in accordance with law, the irregularities which occur before the notification of election under rule 41 (2) of the Election Rules, notifying the name of returned candidate in the official Gazette can be taken up by the Election Authority. In other words it is only those post elections disputes, which can be taken up by the Election Tribunal by an election petition that have been excluded from the jurisdiction of the Election Authorities and no other. A similar view has been taken by this Court in James Ryas Masih v. Punjab Local Councils Election Authority, Lahore and others 1981 SCMR 919 and Ahmad Khan v. Punjab Local Councils Election Authority, Lahore and others 1981 SCM R 1250."
9. According to this authoritative pronouncement of Supreme Court, publication of result of an election in the official Gazette serves as a line of demarcation between the jurisdiction of the Election Tribunal and that of the Election Authority inasmuch as it is on such publication of the result that jurisdiction to look into election disputes becomes available to the Election Tribunal and the jurisdiction of the Election Authority to do so comes to an end. Result of the election in dispute has not so far been published in the official Gazette and, therefore, it is the force of Election Authority and not that of the Election Tribunal which is presently available to the petitioners for seeking redress by taking exception to the irregularities alleged to have been committed to their prejudice. If the matter in dispute is placed before the Election Authority before the success of the respondents is notified in the official Gazette, the provisions of subsection (2) of section 17 of the said Ordinance shall not preclude the Election Authority from examining the matter and allowing relief in the light of the provisions of subsection (1) of section 17. However, if the petitioners fail to approach the Election Authority before the result of the disputed election is published in the official Gazette, they will be able to take their grievance before the Election Tribunal which will be able to inquire into their complaint and grant appropriate relief. In either case, another (Here in italics] adequate remedy is available to them and therefore, we are not inclined to interfere in exercise of our Constitutional jurisdiction. The writ petitions are, accordingly, dismissed in limine without expressing any opinion on the merits thereof.