ISLAMABAD HIGH COURT W.P. No.1131 Of 2021
 |
ISLAMABAD HIGH COURT W.P. No.1131 Of 2021 |
ISLAMABAD HIGH COURT W.P. No.1131/2021ISLAMABAD HIGH COURT W.P. No.1131/2021 Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani Versus Federation of paistan through secretary, minister of law and Justice & 5 others
چیئرمین سینٹ الیکشن میں 7 ووٹ مسترد کرنے کیخلاف یوسف رضا گیلانی کی درخواست اسلام آباد ہائی کورٹ نے خارج کردی۔ صادق سنجرانی ھی چیئرمین سینٹ ھونگے۔ چیف جسٹس اطہر من اللہ نے فیصلہ میں تحریر کیا ھے کہ چیئرمین ڈپٹی چیئرمین سینٹ کا الیکشن ہاوس کی پروسیڈنگ ھے۔ جسے آئین کے آرٹیکل 69 کے تحت کسی عدالت میں چیلنج نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ چیف جسٹس اطہر من اللہ نے فیصلہ میں قرار دیا کہ چیئرمین سینٹ کیخلاف آرٹیکل(7)53 کے تحت تحریک عدم اعتماد کے ذریعہ ھی اسے عہدہ سے ہٹایا جا سکتا ھے۔
JUDGMENT SHEET
IN THE ISLAMABAD HIGH COURT, ISLAMABAD
(JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
W.P. No.1131/2021
Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani
Versus
Federation of Pakistan through the secretary, minister of law and
Justice & 5 others
Petitioner by
Mr. Farooq H. Naek. Sr. ASC Mr. Javed Iqbal Wains, Advocate. Raia Shakeel Abbasi Advocate Barrister Usman Waleed. Advocate.
Date of Hearing
24-03-2021.
ATHAR MINALLAH. C... Senator Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani (hereinafter referred to as the "Petitioner") has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the "Constitution'), challenging the process of election to the post of the Chairman of the Senate of Pakistan and the rejection of seven
votes by the Presiding Officer, namely, Senator Syed Muzaffar
Hussain Shah, in particular. The Petitioner asserts that he was nominated as a joint candidate of the Pakistan Democratic Movement (hereinafter referred to as "PDM) to contest the
election against respondent no.6 i.e. Senator Mohammad Sadiq
Sanjrani. It is the case of the Petitioner that the PDM had the
required numerical strength to elect a Senator as Chairman of the
Senate but the rejection of seven votes deprived the majority of its constitutional right. it has been alleged that the presiding officer was biased and that the seven votes were rejected malafidely and
illegally. The seven voters, all of whom were worthy members of the Senate, had stamped the respective ballot papers on the printed
name of the Petitioner instead of the space in front of it. It is an admitted position that the election process was held under Article
60 of the Constitution read with the Rules of Procedure and Conduct
of Business in the Senate, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the
"Rules of 2012"). The procedure governing the election to the
office of the Chairman of the Senate of Pakistan has been described
under rule 9 of the Rules of 2012. It is noted that the entire election
process was held and regulated internally by the Majlis-e-Shoora
(Parliament) without the involvement of any other outside entity
such as the Election Commission of Pakistan.
2.
Mr. Farooq H. Naek, who learned Sr. ASC, has been heard at
length. He was asked to assist this Court regarding two crucial
questions, whether the validity of the election to the office of the
Chairman of the Senate could be called into question and whether
any other adequate remedy was available to the Petitioner under
the Constitution to remedy the alleged wrong without involving the judicial branch of the State. He has contended that the election
process impugned by the Petitioner does not fall within the ambit of
the bar contained under Article 69. He has also argued that no
adequate remedy is provided under the law to remedy the alleged wrong. Reliance has been placed on the cases titled 'Asif Ali Zardari
It is the case of the petitioner that he was a joint
candidate of the PDM which commands a majority in the Senate of
Pakistan and that he ought to have been declared as a returned
candidate because of the numerical strength. It has been asserted in
the memorandum of the petition that the PDM has the support of 51
worthy Senators as against 47 who had supported respondent no.6. It is noted that Article 53(7)(c) of the Constitution is attracted in the case of removal of the Chairman of Senate and the same is reproduced as follows.
"53 speakers and deputy speaker of national assembly"
Deputy
(7) The office of Speaker or
Speaker shall become vacant if:
(c)
He has been removed from office by a resolution of the Assembly, of which not less than seven days' notice has been given and which is approved by a majority vote of the total membership of the assembly.
15. The Petitioner asserts that, as a joint candidate of the PDM, he has the support of the majority of the worthy members of the Senate. It is thus obvious that the majority cannot only remove
respondent no.6 but, simultaneously, elect the Petitioner to the
office of the Chairman. If this is the case, then democracy and
Appropriate constitutional treatment is available for the applicant
Adopting such a course of remedy would affirm the support of the
majority of the worthy members of the Senate. This Court is satisfied that an adequate constitutional
remedy is indeed available for establishing that the seven worthy Senators had actually intended to cast their votes in favor of the Petitioner. In such an eventuality the judicial branch ought to
exercise restraint, notwithstanding the bar contained under Article
69 of the Constitution.
For the above
reasons, the
petition is neither
maintainable nor is this Court inclined to exercise its extraordinary
jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution by issuing notices. Consequently, the petition is accordingly dismissed. This court is expected to maintain dignity, integrity, and stability
freedom
of Majlis-e-Shoora
(Parliament),
the
chosen
Representatives and the political leadership will try to resolve disputes without involving the judicial branch in the state, implementing privileges, powers and immunizations.
Constitution.
(CHIEF JUSTICE)
Approved for reporting.
0 Comments