' MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN, J.----By filing this Constitutional petition Syed Abdul Aziz Ghaznavi prays that Notification No, EAP-4(1)/9, dated 21-2-1991, issued by Secretary, Punjab Local Councils Election Authority, Lahore, repondent No, 1, wherein besides other local councils schedules for holding the election of Chairman of Town Committee Sadiq Ganj was notified, be declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
2. According to the schedule given in impugned Notification ,for the election of Chariman of the aforesaid Town Committee, the Returning Officer invited Nomination papers by 2-3-1991 whereupon Syed Abdul Aziz Ghaznavi, petitioner, and Muhammad Qasim, respondent No,3 who are sitting councillors of Town Committee Mandi Sadiq Ganj, filed their nomination papers for Chairmanship. Assistant Commissioner, Minchinabad, on 3-3-1991 rejected the nomination papers of respondent No,3 who filed an appeal before A.D.C.(G), Bahawalpur, which was accepted vide his order, dated 6-3-1991. Feeling aggrieved of this order the petitioner has field instant writ petition.
3. Parawise comments from respondent No,2 were called for today with the direction that election be held as already arranged but its result shall not be notified till further orders.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the impugned notification, dated 21-2- 1991, giving schedule of election of Chairman/Vicechairman of various local councils in Punjab (including election of Chairman of Town Committee Mandi Sadiq Ganj) is violative of rule 38 of the Punjab Local Government (Election) Rules, 1979, inasmuch as neither the Returning Officer nor the Appellate Authority has been notified prior to the holding of elections, therefore, whole process of inviting the nomination papers and acceptance/rejection thereof is absolutely without jurisdiction.
The respondent with his comments has supplied a copy of Notification No, EAP-20(63)/87, dated 26-12-1987, wherein Punjab Local Councils Election Authority, in pursuance of rule 58 has appointed Assistant Commissioners of the respective Tehsils as Returning Officers for conducting the elections of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the local councils in the Punjab. So, Assistant Commissioner, Minchinabad, by virtue of the said Notification, was appointed as Returning Officer, for this election and A.D.C.(G), Bahawalnagar, vide Notification, dated 4-11-1987 is the Appellate Authority, the objection raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is repelled being without any merit.
5. Learned counsel has raised another objection that the Returning Officer has failed to appoint a Presiding Officer for the polling station as required under rule 10, therefore, elections held on 14-3- 1991, though not notified, are rendered totally illegal. Replying learned counsel for the respondent submitted that this objection has not been taken in the election petition, therefore, the petitioner is precluded from raising this question at this late stage. He further submits that the amended rule does not require appointment of a Presiding Officer meaning thereby the Returning Officer himself would do the job. He informs that the petitioner took part in the election held on 14-3-1991 where the members/voters' turn out was 100% and that the petitioner has actually lost. He further says that the petitioner is estopped to raise this objection by his conduct.
6. It is a fact that the objection now raised by learned counsel for the petitioner has not been taken in his petition. He has not made any request, oral or written, for amending his petition either. The process of election in question, as we understand, is already complete in which the petitioner has fully participated without raising little finger against supervising of polling by the Returning Officer.
This objection does not find mention in the writ petition as well. We have deliberately refrained from making any comments on the said objection to avoid prejudice to any party since we are dismissing this petition on the short ground that it is not maintainable for the reason that section 24 of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979, says that elections ought to be challenged through election petitions. Furthermore, it is now well-settled that disputes arising out of election must be raised before Election Tribunal and not before any other Court even at intermediary stage.
If any authority is needed we would refer to Election Commission of Pakistan v. Javaid Hashmi (PLD 1989 SC 396).
7. For what has been stated above, we are of the view that petitioner's remedy lay before Election Tribunal, therefore, this petition being not maintainable is hereby dismissed in limine.