1. Petitioner who was appointed as Lambardar was placed under suspension by the Tehsildar concerned vide his order dated 19.02.2000 on the allegations which are summarized in the said order. Petitioner being aggrieved of the same, has challenged the said order before this Court inter alia on the ground that in terms of the Jammu and Kashmir Lambardari Rules, 1980 notified vide Notification SRO No. 363 of 1980, a Lambardar can be placed under suspension by a Collector. 2. The official respondents have not filed any reply to this petition. However, private respondent has filed objection wherein he has admitted that the petitioner was appointed as Headman by the competent authority and he is entitled to continue till holding of fresh elections. It is also admitted in the said objections that respondent No. 6 was instigated by one Bashir Ahmad Akhoon in creating unnecessary hurdles in the way of petitioner for collecting land revenue. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the matter. 4. Rule 10 of Lambardari Rules is reproduced as under: "Punishment Where a Lambardar contravened any of the provisions of these rules or neglects to perform the duties imposed upon him by these rules or any other law for the time being in force, the Collector may by order direct- (a) That the remuneration to which he is entitled be with-held or forfeited to the Government for a period not exceeding one year; or (b) That he shall be placed under suspension for a period not exceeding one year." 5. This petition deserves to be allowed on the ground that a Lumbardar can be placed under suspension in terms of rule 10 of J&K Lambardari Rules, 1980 by a Collector and admittedly Tehsildar is not a Collector, so the petitioner has been placed under suspension by an incompetent authority. Secondly, in terms of same rule the suspension is a punishment and punishment can be imposed upon a person only after conducting an enquiry or atleast after giving him an opportunity to show cause. 6. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that neither the procedure has been followed nor any show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. The order impugned in this petition is held to be illegal. 7. This petition is, accordingly, allowed. The order impugned is quashed.