The availability of a candidate in the village is a critical factor for the appointment of Lambardar, outweighing qualifications alone.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Rajesh Bhardwaj, J.

Prayer in the present petition is for quashing the impugned order dated 02.08.2017 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Financial Commissioner (Revenue) and order dated 01.12.2016 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Commissioner, Roopnagar Division, Roopnagar being wholly illegal, unjust and unsustainable.

2. Adumbrated facts of the case are that on account of death of Charan Singh, earlier Lambardar of the village on 04.11.2010, post of Lambardar fell vacant and thus, process for the appointment of new Lambardar was initiated. Learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nawanshr granted sanctioned to Tehsildar, Nawanshahr for taking further action vide his order dated 12.01.2011. Resultantly, proclamation was made in the village for inviting applications from the interested and eligible candidates. In pursuance to the same, nine applications were received including the petitioner (Sarup Singh) and respondent No.5 (Jawinder Singh). Their character verifications were conducted from the concerned Police Station. On comparison of their inter-se merits, the petitioner was found to be 53 years of age and BA pass and Degree in Electrical. Besides this he owned 2 acres of land and he was also found to be an ex-service-man having retired from Navy. On the other hand, respondent No.5 was found to be 38 years of age and matric pass by qualification. Besides this he owned 6 kanals of land. Learned SDM, Nawanshahr vide his report dated 20.06.2011, recommended the name of respondent No.5 for the appointment of Lambardar. However, learned Collector on evaluation of the inter-se merits and demerits of all the candidates, found the petitioner to be more meritorious and suitable candidate and thus, appointed him as a Lambardar of the village vide order dated 15.09.2011 (Annexure P-2). Aggrieved by the same, the respondent No.5- Jaswinder Singh and co-appellant Piara Singh filed their independent appeals before the Commissioner, Roopnagar Division, Roopnagar. Both the appeals were heard together by learned Divisional Commissioner and after hearing all the sides, he found that appellant Piara Singh had died and thus, his appeal was dismissed, however, the appeal filed by respondent No.5 was accepted and thus, he was appointed as a Lambardar of village vide order dated 02.12.2016 (Annexure P-4). Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 13 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 before the Financial Commissioner. Learned Financial Commissioner heard both the sides and re-appreciated the record, however, finding no merit in the appeal, he dismissed the same vide order dated 02.08.2017 (Annexure P-6) and thus, upheld the order passed by the Commissioner. Hence, aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that on perusal of the inter-se merits of all the candidates in fray, it is apparent that the petitioner was more meritorious and suitable candidate. He submits that the petitioner was more qualified and was retired from Navy. It is submitted that the petitioner rendered his service to the nation and thus, in view of the provisions of Rule 15 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules, he was obviously most meritorious candidate and thus, was rightly appointed by the Collector as a Lambardar of the village. He submits that the petitioner is a resident of village and as per record, it was established that he had a Pucca house in the village and he also owned land in the village. He has submitted that respondent No.5 had encroached upon the Gram Panchayat land, but the same was not appreciated by the Appellate and Revisional authorities. He has submitted that as per law settled, choice of the Collector cannot be interfered with in a cavalier manner and there being no perversity in the order passed by the Collector, the same could not have been interfered with by the Appellate and Revisional authorities. He has submi