ORDER K.S. Janjua, FC. - Brief facts of this case filed under Section 13 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act are that on death of Surain Singh, Lambardar of village Sidhwan Dona, Tehsil Kapurthala a vacancy of Lambardar fell vacant and a proclamation was made in the village. Harbhajan Singh, Sukhwinder Singh, Piara Singh, Sarwan Singh and Joginder Singh applied. After police verification of all the five candidates Tehsildar sent case to SDM, Kapurthala with recommendation in favour of Harbhajan Singh. SDM recommended Joginder Singhs name. Three candidates namely Harbhajan Singh, Joginder Singh and Sukhwinder Singh appeared before District Collector, Kapurthala. Sukhwinder Singh withdrew his name in favour of Joginder Singh. Being younger in age Harbhajan Singh was found more suitable by the District Collector and was appointed Lambardar (5.8.98). 2. Aggrieved by this order Joginder Singh preferred an appeal before Commissioner (A) on the grounds that he was brother of deceased Lambardar, owned more land and his name was recommended by SDM. It was also contended before Commissioner (A) that petitioner is not matriculate and has not produced any certificate in support of his claim. Commissioner (A) held the respondent superior candidate being more educated and having hereditary claim. Appeal was accepted by him (8.10.99) This order has now been impugned before this court. Comparative bio-data of candidates is as follows : Harbhajan Singh Joginder Singh Age 42 Years 58 Years Education Under-Matric Matric Land holding 56 K 19 M 82 K 07 M 3. It was argued by the Petitioners Counsel that the Collector had taken only one point i.e. age into consideration while appointing Joginder Singh as lambardar. Age alone is no merit. It should be seen whether the candidate can perform the duties satisfactorily or not. 4. On the other hand it was argued that the notice of the Collector should not be lightly interfered with and disturbed unnecessarily. If there is no illegality or perversity in the order of Collector, it should be allowed to hold sway. 5. During the arguments, counsel for respondent produced a copy of order of Collector Kapurthala whereby for the same village Sukhwinder Singh son of Joginder Singh has been appointed as Lambardar. Sidhwan Dona is a small village. If Commissioners order is upheld then Joginder Singh and his son Sukhwinder Singh will become the Lambardars of the same village. 5. During the arguments, counsel for respondent produced a copy of order of Collector Kapurthala whereby for the same village Sukhwinder Singh son of Joginder Singh has been appointed as Lambardar. Sidhwan Dona is a small village. If Commissioners order is upheld then Joginder Singh and his son Sukhwinder Singh will become the Lambardars of the same village. This would not be a very desirable situation as close relative should not be appointed as Lambardar of the same village. Since Sukhwinder Singh son of Joginder Singh has been recently appointed as Lambardar of village Sidhwan Dona, only one of the orders can be allowed to operate. Order of Commissioner Appeals (8.10.99) and that of the Collector, Kapurthala (16.8.2000), if allowed, will create monopoly in the village. 6. On merits also, there being no illegality or perversity in the orders of Collector (5.8.98), I am inclined to uphold it. Another factor contributing to this is the recent development of Joginder Singhs son becoming the Lambardar of the village. Order of the Collector (5.8.98) is upheld. Revision petition is allowed. Announced. Petition allowed.