PALA SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order dater August 14, 1997 passed by the Financial Commissioner, Haryana whereby the orders of the Commissioner and the Collector appointing the petitioner as Lambardar were set aside. Post of Lambardar of village Keshpura, Tehsil Ellenabad District Sirsa had fallen vacant. A declaration was made in the village by the Naib Tehsildar inviting the villagers to file application for filling up the post. On a consideration of the claim made by various applicants the Collector by his order September 30, 1994 found the petitioner to be the most suitable candidate for the post and accordingly appointed him. Mangat Ram respondent who was also one of candidates challenged the appointment before the Commissioner, Hissar Division. It was observed by the Commissioner after taking note of the record that the petitioner had rendered useful service to the administration in helping the villagers during floods. It was further observed that he had taken active interest in the family planning programmes initiated in the village. He was, thus, found suitable for the post and consequently the appeal filed my Mangat Ram respondent was dismissed. Still not satisfied he filed a revision petition before the Financial Commissioner who allowed the same and set aside the appointment of the petitioner as Lambardar. The only ground on which the appointment has been set aside is that the petitioner on the date of his appointment was an elected Sarpanch of the village. Accordingly to the Financial Commissioner it was neither desirable nor in public interest to have one person as the Lambardar and Sarpanch of the village.

(2.) WE have perused the impugned order and find that the ground on which the appointment of the petitioner has been set aside is wholly untenable. There is no disqualification under the Rules for a Sarpanch to be appointed as Lambardar. If at all, the post of Sarpanch could be an added qualification for him to be considered for the post of Lambardar. As a matter of fact the same Financial Commissioner in another case took the opposite view and held that a Lambardar who was also a Sarpanch was more suitable than the others for the post. We are, therefore, satisfied that the impugned order of the Financial Commissioner is not sustainable.