IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 26.02.2026 Shamsher Singh ....Petitioner Vs.

Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present: Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Navneet Singh, Addl. A.G. Punjab.

Mr. A.S. Khinda, Advocate for respondent No.4.

*****

HARSH BUNGER J. (Oral)

1 Petition herein is, inter-alia, seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari, for setting aside the order dated 31.05.2018 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned District Collector, Kapurthala, whereby respondent No.4 - Gurpreet Singh has been appointed as Lambardar of village Chak Patti Balu Bahadur, Tehsil Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala.

1.1. A further prayer has been made for setting aside the order dated 18.11.2020 (Annexure P-3) passed by learned Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar and order dated 11.07.2022 (Annexure P-5) passed by learned Financial Commisioner (Appeals), Punjab, whereby, the appeal as well as revision petition preferred by the petitioner against the learned Collector’s order dated 31.05.2018 (Annexure P-1) have been dismissed, respectively.

2. Briefly, upon demise of Sh. Gurnam Singh, previous Lambardar of village Chak Patti Balu Bahadur, Tehsil Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala, proceedings were initiated for filing up the said vacancy, wherein petitioner (Shamsher Singh) and respondent No.4 (Gurpeet Singh) were also the candidates.

2.1. The learned Naib Tehsildar, Sultanpur Lodhi as well as the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sultanpur Lodhi, recommended the candidature of respondent No.4 (Gurpreet Singh) for appointment to the aforesaid vacancy and placed the matter before the learned Collector, Kapurthala.

2.2. Learned Collector, Kapurthala after considering the relative merits and demerits of the candidates found respondent No.4 (Gurpreet Singh) to be more suitable candidate and accordingly appointed him as the Lambardar of village Chak Patti Balu Bahadur, Tehsil Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala, vide order dated 31.05.2018 (Annexure P-1).

2.3. Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order dated 31.05.2018 (Annexure P-1), present petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 18.11.2020 (Annexure P-3).

2.4. Still aggrieved, the petitioner (Shamsher Singh) preferred a revision petition (ROR No.251 of 2021) before the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab, which has also been dismissed vide order dated 11.07.2022 (Annexure P-5).

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

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Revenue Authorities below have erred in law and facts in passing the impugned orders, as the better merits of the petitioner have been ignored. It is submitted that, the petitioner is son of the previous Lambardar and therefore, has a hereditary claim for the appointment to the aforesaid vacancy, which has not been considered by the Revenue Authorities. It is further submitted that the petitioner is more meritorious in terms of educational qualification also, as he is a Graduate and has done Diploma in Mechanical Engineering, whereas respondent No.4 has studied only up to 10+2. It is next submitted that, the petitioner is also younger in age than respondent No.4, and all the aforesaid factors have been brushed aside by the Revenue Authorities below while appointing respondent No.4 as the Lambardar.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 has opposed the aforesaid submissions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner. It is contended that once the learned Collector found respondent No.4 as suitable candidate for appointment to the post of Lambardar and appointed as such, which has been further affirmed by the learned Commissioner as well as the learned Financial Commissi