Section 22(1)
|
Local Government (Union Parishad) Election Rules, 2010
Rule 90, 53(1)
Local Government (Union Parishad) Ain, 2009
Section 22(1)
In the instant cases facts are not of such type that justify the invocation
of the power of the EC under Rule 90 of Rules, 2010 to cancel the election
because, firstly, the complaints by the defeated candidates were made on
the following day of election and secondly, the election was held without
any interruption and disturbance. It is admitted that the election result
in form-da and the consolidated election result were sent to the EC. The
rest of the matters are disputed question of facts which are essentially
matters to be decided by the Election Tribunal exercising judicial
authority, not by the EC in exercise of its plenary and supervisory
authority which is administrative in nature. To decide otherwise would
amount to giving the scheme of the law a ‘go-bye’. Under Section 22(1)
of the Ain, 2009 read with Rule 53(1) of the Rules, 2010 a candidate can
raise question or objection in the matter before the Election Tribunal by
presenting election petition. ...Md. Shakhawat Hossain & ors Vs. Election
Commission and ors, (Civil), 18 SCOB [2023] HCD 236
....View Full Judgment
|
Md. Shakhawat Hossain & ors Vs. Election Commission and ors |
18 SCOB [2023] HCD 236 |
Section 26(2) & (3)
|
স্থানীয় সরকার (ইউনিয়ন পরিষদ)
নির্বাচন বিধিমালা, ২০১০ (as amended
in 2016)
Rule 12
Section 26(2) & (3) of the স্থানীয় সরকার
(ইউনিয়ন পরিষদ) আইন, ২০০৯
Affidavit and declaration in the local government elections:
It is, however, the mandate of law that while submitting nomination paper
for contesting Paurashava election, Upazilla Parishad election, City
Corporation election and Parliamentary election the candidate is required
to submit affidavit ‘হলফনামা’ in a prescribed from along
with the nomination paper containing detail information on his/her
educational qualification, his/her implication in any criminal case, if
there be any, occupation, source of income, description of property owned
by him/her, including family members and loan liability, if there be any,
with declaration that all information of the respective documents so
provided are correct and true to the best of his knowledge. Conversely, in
Union Parishad election the candidate is relieved from making such
disclosure. The only requirement is that vide Rule 12 of the
“স্থানীয় সরকার (ইউনিয়ন
পরিষদ) নির্বাচন বিধিমালা,
২০১০” (as amended in 2016) the candidate is to give certificate
“প্রত্যায়নপত্র”although vide Section 26(3) of
the Ain, 2009 the candidate is required to submit an affidavit
‘হলফনামা’ along with the nomination paper declaring that
he is not disqualified vide Section 26(2) to contest the respective
election. ...Mohammed Faruk ul Azam Vs. The Election Commission, (Civil),
17 SCOB [2023] HCD 1
....View Full Judgment
|
Mohammed Faruk ul Azam Vs. The Election Commission |
17 SCOB [2023] HCD 1 |
|
The Local Government (Union Parishad) Act, 2009 and
the Local Government (Union Parishad) Rules 2010
Where the total number of votes cast in a centre exceeds either the total
number of ballot papers issued to the centre or the total number of votes
enrolled for that centre, or if during the counting of ballot papers a
ballot box is found missing or it is snatched away or if the Presiding
Officer makes glaringly contradictory reports as to the result of the
counting of votes, without reasonable explanation, then the Election
Commission need not wait for determination of the dispute by the Election
Tribunal. But where no such thing has happened but allegation is brought
after the declaration of the result then it is always desirable that
dispute, if any, should go to the Tribunal for determination. …E C
Bangladesh & anr. Vs. Noruzzaman & ors., (Civil), 11 SCOB [2019] AD 1
....View Full Judgment
|
Election Commission Bangladesh & anr. Vs. Noruzzaman & ors. |
11 SCOB [2019] AD 1 |
Chairman election matter–
|
Chairman election matter–
No complaint was made by the petitioner or anyone else during polling hours
and there was delay of seven days in lodging any complaint, we do not find
any merit in this petition. We take support from the view expressed in the
case of Altaf Hossain vs Abul Kashem and others, 45 DLR (AD)53, where it
was observed that where allegation is brought after the declaration of the
result then it is always desirable that dispute, if any, should go to the
Tribunal for determination. Facts and circumstances discussed above, we do
not find any illegality or impropriety in the decision of the High Court
Division to discharge the Rule Nisi. The civil petition for leave to appeal
is dismissed. .....Syed Shariful Islam =VS= Md. Toufiqul Islam Toufiq,
(Civil), 2018 (2) [5 LM (AD) 354]
....View Full Judgment
|
Syed Shariful Islam =VS= Md. Toufiqul Islam Toufiq |
5 LM (AD) 354 |