IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.578 of 2013 Reserved on: 10.07.2025 Date of Decision: 25.07.2025 Sanjay Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & others ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge Whether approved for reporting?Yes.

For the petitioner: Mr. Ajay Kumar, Senior Advocate with o Mr. Rohit, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr. Pratush Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondent-State. Mr. N.K. Thakur, Senior Advocate with h Mr. Divya Raj Singh and Ms .Ritu Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.5.

Satyen Vaidya, Judge The instant petition has been filed for following substantive relief:

“It is therefore prayed that this writ petition may very kindly be allowed by issuance of writ in the nature certiorari or other writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside the order Annexure P11 dated 11.12.2012 passed by the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals) H.P. in case No. 10/2012 titled Shri Kamal Singh versus Shri Sanjay Kumar with further directions to restore the orders passed by Respondent No. 3 and 4 Annexure P6 and P9 be passed in favor of the petitioner and against the Respondents Records of the case may very kindly be called for and such other further order or relief or directio.n, as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts of the case, be also passed in the ends of law and justice. Costs of the petition be also allowed to the petitioner.”

2. Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the petition are that on vacation of the prost of Lambardar of Village Jankaur, Tehsil and District Una on the death of Joginder Singh on 27.10.2010, procesos was initiated by District Collector, Una for appointment Cof Lambardar of aforesaid village.

3. Petitioner Sanjay Kumar and respondent No.5 Kamal Sinhgh were amongst various other candidates, who applied for gthe post.

4. District Collector, Una appointed Kamal Singh as Lambardar of village Jankaur vide order dated 29.01.2004, passed in Case No.72 of 2003.

5. Sanjay Kumar challenged the order of appointment of Kamal Singh as Lambardar by way of appeal under Section 14 of Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1954 (for short, “the Act”) before the Divisional Commissioner, Kangra. The appeal was allowed vide order dated 22.11.2006 and the matter was remanded back to the District Collector, Una for considering the candidature of both candidates i.e. Sanjay Kumar and Kamal Singh again on the basis of factors specified in Rule 15 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules.

6. Thereafter, the District Collector vide order dated 30.05.2008 appointed Sanjay Kumar as Lambardar. This order was now challenged by Kamal Singh before Divisional Commissioner, Kangra, who allowed the appeal, but the said order was set aside by this Court vide judgment dated 03.08.2011, passed in CMPMO No.206 of 2011 and the appeal was directed to be heard and decided by Divisional Commissioner, Mandi.

7. In compliance, the Divisional Commissioner, Mandi vide order dated 12.12.2011 dismissed the appeal of Kamal Singh and affirmed the order dated 30.05.2008 passed by the District Collector, Una.

8. Kamal Singh further assailed the order of Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, before the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Himachal Pradesh by filing Revision Petition under Section 17 of the Act. Learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order dated 11.12.2012 has allowed the Revision Petition of Kamal Singh and has affirming the order of District Collector, Una dated 29.01.2004 approving the appointment of Kamal Singh as Lambardar of village Jankaur, hence, this petition.

9. I have heard Mr. Ajay Kumar, learned Senior Advocate, representing the petitioner, Mr. N.K. Thakur, learned Senior Advocate, representing private res pondent and Mr. Pratyush Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, representing the State and have also gone through the record carefully.

10. This Court has been called upon to exercise the writ jurisdiction against an order of the statutory a