JUDGMENT :

HARSH BUNGER J.

Petition herein is, inter alia, seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside order dated 18.01.2016 (Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Financial Commissioner, Haryana.

2. Briefly, upon demise of Sh. Bhagat Ram, previous Lambardar (Backward Class) of Village Makhdum Jagdan (Noorwala), Panipat, District Panipat, proceedings for filling up the said vacancy were initiated, wherein petitioner – Mohan Lal and respondent No.4 – Krishan Lal were also the candidates.

2.1 The learned Collector, Panipat, vide order dated 04.07.2013 (Annexure P-1), appointed respondent No.4 – Krishan Lal as Lambardar of Village Makhdum Jagdan.

2.2 Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order dated 04.07.2013 (Annexure P-1), the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Divisional Commissioner, Rohtak, which came to be allowed vide order dated 15.11.2013 (Annexure P-2), whereby the Collector's order (Annexure P-1) was set aside and the matter was remanded to the learned Collector, Panipat, with a direction to decide afresh on the basis of the merits and demerits of the candidates.

2.3 Being dissatisfied, respondent No.4 preferred a revision petition (ROR No.245 of 2013-14) before the learned Financial Commissioner, Haryana, which was allowed vide order dated 18.01.2016 (Annexure P-3), whereby the Divisional Commissioner's order (Annexure P-2) was set aside and the Collector's order dated 04.07.2013 (Annexure P-1), appointing respondent No.4 as the Lambardar of Village Makhdum Jagdan, was restored.

3. In the aforementioned circumstances, petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court, seeking relief(s) as noticed hereinabove.

4. Heard.

5. Apparently, the petitioner was appointed as Lambardar of Village Makhdum Jagdan by the learned Collector, Panipat, vide order dated 04.07.2013 (Annexure P-1), by observing as under:-

“After hearing the counsels of both the parties, I have gone through the case file thoroughly. I have reached at a conclusion that Krishan Lal is more appropriate candidate than Mohan Lal because in support of Krishan Lal 970 people got recorded their statements whereas in favour of Mohan Lal 447 people got recorded their statements. Krishan Lal has contributed to 9 cases of family planning whereas Mohan Lal has contributed to 8 cases. Nominee Krishan Lal got deposited Rs.95 lacs in various schemes whereas Mohan Lal got deposited Rs.43 lacs only, which clearly indicates that Krishan Lal has better reputation in society. Nominee Krishan Lal is son of Late Bhagat Ram and he was appointed as Sarbara Lambardar. So, he has experience of work of Lambardar. In comparison, Mohan Lal is not a permanent resident of Noorwala because he is enrolled as voter in Gangoha Vidhan Sabha area and in Panipat Gramin Vidhan Sabha. At the time of argument, Ld. Counsel for Mohan Lal submitted that he has moved an application for deletion of his name from U.P. voter list is not found appropriate as Mohan Lal moved application on 10.11.2011, which is after a gap of nine months when the Mishal was opened. Nominee Krishan Lal also has hereditary claim. Thus considering the above facts, Krishan Lal S/o Bhagat Ram R/o Noorwala is appointed as new Lambardar of village Noorwala in place of late Bhagat Ram. Sandh Lambardari be issued. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.”

5.1 A perusal of the above extracted observations would reveal that the learned Collector, Panipat, has failed to consider all the relevant factors envisaged under Rule 15 of the Haryana Land Revenue Rules, while making the appointment of Lambardar.

5.2 Rule 15 of the Haryana Land Revenue Rules reads as under:-

"15. Matters to be considered in first appointments.-- In all first appointments of headman, regard shall be had among other matters to-

(a),([his experience as substitute/Sarbarah Lambardar;])

(b) extent of property in the estate possessed by the candidate;

(c) services rendered to the State by himself or by his family;

(d) his