Rules 4 and 9
|
The 672 voters of Uttar Kistakathi have been included in the voters’ list
of Ward No. 7 of Jhalakathi Pourashava, and Pourashava and Upazila
elections have been held in the meantime with the voters’ list drawn up
in accordance with the order of Appellate Division and as such Appellate
Division does not finds any illegality or infirmity in the impugned
judgement and order of the High Court Division.
The Appellate Division considered its earlier order dated 15.03.2011, it
appears that there was no direction to include the said 672 voters in the
voters’ list of Ponabalia Union and the option was given to include those
voters in the voters’ list of Jhalokathi Pourashava. For ease of
reference, Appellate Division may quote a portion of Appellate Division
earlier order as follows: “However, we would like to add that if the
Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Co-operatives, the
respondent No. 2, can publish gazette notification in accordance with
Pourashava Election Rules including Uttar Kistakathi within the Jhalokathi
Pourashava in the intervening period of publication of gazette notification
declaring election schedule as per direction of the High Court Division,
there would be no bar to hold election as per voter list published
including those 672 voters of Uttar Kistakathi.” This option was followed
by the authority concerned and in due course the said 672 voters of Uttar
Kistakathi have been included in the voters’ list of Ward No. 7 of
Jhalakathi Pourashava, and Pourashava and Upazila elections have been held
in the meantime with the voters’ list drawn up in accordance with the
order of Appellate Division and as such Appellate Division does not finds
any illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgement and order of the High
Court Division.
Abdul Jalil Khan and others -Vs.- Bangladesh and others (Civil) 13 ALR (AD)
4-8
|
Abdul Jalil Khan and others -Vs.- Bangladesh and others |
13 ALR (AD) 4 |