JUDGMENT Mr. Surya Kant, J.: (Oral) - The matter pertains to appointment of Lambardar of village Dialpura Mirza, Patti Khan Singh, Tehsil Phul, District Bathinda. 2. Learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the matter is still pending consideration before the Collector, Bathinda and final selection has not been made so far. 3. The appellant also applied for consideration of his claim for the post of Lambardar but his application was rejected on the ground that as per the report of Tehsildar, a criminal case was found registered against him at the relevant time. 4. The appellant asserts that in that criminal case, he stood acquitted, therefore, right to consideration cannot be denied to him only on the ground that he was facing trial at the time of consideration. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.5, on the other hand, asserts that he is the most suitable candidate he being the son of the deceased-Lambardar. Similarly, respondent No.6 also claims himself to be one of the most suitable candidate. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that inter se merit of all the candidates is to be seen, compared and determined by the Collector in exercise of his statutory powers. The relevant factors which are required to be taken into consideration by the Collector are also well known. We have no reason to doubt that the Collector shall finally select a candidate purely on the basis of merit, without being influenced by any other consideration. We thus express no opinion on the merits of the candidates. 7. So far as the appellant is concerned, we are of the considered view that generally, mere registration of a criminal case cannot be a ground to deny the right of consideration. However, the nature of allegations levelled in that case and the evidence led before the Court, even if it is a case of acquittal and/or the final outcome of the trial, can have some bearing while determining the inter se merit or suitability. It necessarily means that the claim of the appellant need not be rejected at the threshold. However, the nature of allegations levelled in that case and the evidence led before the Court, even if it is a case of acquittal and/or the final outcome of the trial, can have some bearing while determining the inter se merit or suitability. It necessarily means that the claim of the appellant need not be rejected at the threshold. If on comparison of inter se merit and having regard to the nature of allegations levelled in the criminal case, the Collector is of the view that he is not a suitable person, the Competent Authority shall be at liberty to take such a decision at the time of final selection. 8. With these observations, the order of the learned Single Judge stands modified and the appeal is disposed of accordingly.