Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 1733 (PNJ)

Moti Lal v. State of Haryana and Ors

2013-12-20

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN

body2013
Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. 1. The post of Lambardar of village Sandwa, Tehsil Tosham, District Bhiwani, fell vacant on the death of Sukh Ram. Both A.C. 2nd Grade and the A.C. 1st Grade, Tosham, recommended the name of the petitioner to the Collector for appointment on the said post. However, vide his order dated 13.07.2010, respondent No. 4 was appointed by the Collector and the appeal and revision filed by the petitioner before the Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner were dismissed on 14.01.2011 and 29.07.2011 respectively. The petitioner filed C.W.P. No. 20838 of 2011 which was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the Financial Commissioner to pass fresh order taking into account the order dated 11.03.2004 passed by the Collector by which the petitioner was appointed as Sarbrah Lambardar. After remand, the Financial Commissioner again decided to appoint respondent No. 4 as Lambardar of the village vide his order dated 19.08.2013, observing as under:- I have heard the counsels of both the parties and looked into the record carefully. Sh. Moti Lal is 40 years of age and has studied upto 10th class. His character is good and owns 37 Kanals 08 Marlas of land. Sh. Sajjan Singh is 38 years of age and has studied upto 12th class. His character is good and owns 30 Kanals and 09 Marlas of land. Both the candidates on the criteria of age, education, character and land holding are almost the same. Sh. Sajjan Singh is a member of village Literacy Committee, has helped in Government Family Planning cases and is also of a member of Red Cross Society. Sh. Moti Lal has claimed to be involved in tree plantation and motivating others for blood donation. But there is no proof in support of his claims. He himself has never donated blood and, therefore, he was least qualified to motivate others. Sh. Moti Lal was appointed Sarbrah Lambardar. This fact is not in dispute. He submitted an affidavit dated 29.04.2010 undertaking to mobilize small savings of ` 5.00 lac. Till date, he has not honoured this undertaking. This raises a serious question on the integrity of Sh. Moti Lal. He is certainly not desirable as Lambardar of the village even though he has served as Sarbrah Lambardar. This fact is not in dispute. He submitted an affidavit dated 29.04.2010 undertaking to mobilize small savings of ` 5.00 lac. Till date, he has not honoured this undertaking. This raises a serious question on the integrity of Sh. Moti Lal. He is certainly not desirable as Lambardar of the village even though he has served as Sarbrah Lambardar. I have no doubt that integrity is more important than experience for the reason that given the job profile of Lambardar, a man of common intelligence can pick up the same in hardly anytime. Accordingly, I uphold the earlier order of the Collector and the Commissioner appointing Sajjan Singh as Lambardar of village Sandwa, District Bhiwani. The present petition stands dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondent No. 1 has not taken into consideration his qualification as a Sarbrah Lambardar and has referred to a notification dated 17.06.2010 in support of his submission. 2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that all the authorities under the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") have been consistent in appointing respondent No. 4 as Lambardar and for that matter experience of the petitioner as Sarbrah Lambardar would not have much effect because respondent No. 4 has been found to be more suitable for the post of Lambardar by all the authorities under the Act. In this regard, he has also referred to all the documents in order to show that he has been a member of the village Literacy Committee, helped in Government Family Planning cases and is also a member of the Red Cross Society, whereas the petitioner had no proof of tree plantation and motivating others for blood donation because he himself had never donated the blood and despite the fact that he had submitted an undertaking in the form of affidavit dated 29.04.2010 to mobilize small savings of ` 5 lacs, did not honour that undertaking so far. It is further submitted that notification dated 17.06.2010 with regard to experience as Sarbrah Lambardar, relied upon by the petitioner, talks of the draft rules as the said notification has been issued in terms of Section 28(1) of the Act and published in terms of Section 156 of the Act for inviting objections in respect of the draft rules upto the period of 15 days but the petitioner has failed to produce on record notification with regard to amendment in the rules subsequently made after 17.06.2010 notification. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the appointment of respondent No. 4 as Lambardar of the village cannot be disturbed as it is a consistent choice of all the authorities under the Act and there is no perversity in the impugned order(s). Hence, the present writ petition is dismissed being denuded of any merit.