JUDGMENT :

HARSH BUNGER, J. 

Petition herein is, inter alia, seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside order dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure P-4) passed by the learned Collector, Sangrur; order dated 02.04.2025 (Annexure P-5) passed by the learned Divisional Commissioner, Patiala; and order dated 29.05.2025 (Annexure P-6) passed by the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab.

2. Briefly, upon demise of Sh. Ajaib Singh, previous Lambardar of Village Ghasiwala, Teshil Sunam, District Sangrur, proceedings for filling up the said vacancy were initiated, wherein petitioner – Makhan Singh and respondent No.6 – Gagandeep Singh were also the candidates.

2.1 The learned Collector, Sangrur, upon considering the relative merits and demerits of all the candidates, found respondent No.6 – Gagandeep Singh to be the most suitable candidate and, accordingly, appointed him as Lambardar of Village Ghasiwala, vide order dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure P-4).

2.2 Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure P-4), petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Divisional Commissioner, Patiala, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 02.04.2025 (Annexure P-5).

2.3 Still dissatisfied, petitioner preferred a revision petition (ROR No.417 of 2025) before the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab, which was also dismissed vide order dated 29.05.2025 (Annexure P-6).

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

4. Heard.

5. In the instant case, respondent No.6 has consistently been found to be more meritorious than the petitioner and was, accordingly, appointed as Lambardar of Village Ghasiwala.

6. The learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab, while upholding the appointment of respondent No.6 as Lambardar, returned the following findings vide order dated 29.05.2025 (Annexure P-6):-

“6. I have heard Ld. Counsel for both the parties, gone through their submissions and have also perused the orders of the courts below. The appointment of the respondent was made after due consideration of the applications received andrecommendations submitted by the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade and the Sub Divisional Magistrate. The authorities evaluated the merits of the candidates and selected the respondent in accordance with the procedure prescribed as per law. The respondent is a permanent resident of the village, holds a BA degree and owns land measuring 8 kanal 7 marla. The arguments presented by the petitioner about hereditary right to the post of lambardar based on family history and prior service as Sarbarah lambardar from 17.06.2016 till 08.08.2023 were considered. However, it is well settled that as per law that mere hereditary claim does not create an absolute right to appointment in absence of statutory or regulatory provisions mandating such appointment. The record reflects that the service of the petitioner in the capacity of Sarbarah lambardar ended upon the death of the petitioner’s father on 08.08.2023 and the post was declared vacant thereafter with fresh applications invited. The educational qualification of the respondent was duly considered and no material on record discredits the validity of the degree. The arguments that the respondent degree is not recognized as per law have not been supported by any document or authoritative evidence. The arguments that the petitioner was recommended by the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade cannot be given overriding weight as the final order vests with the appointing authority after taking into account all relevant aspects and recommendations. The possession of land measuring about 6 acre by the petitioner is noted but possession of land alone does not create entitlement to the post of lambardar. On the other hand, ownership of 8 kanal 7 marla land and residence in the village by the respondent further strengthen eligibility in terms of social standing an