SUMER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Jaswant Singh, who is father of respondent No.4, expired on 31.12.2003. This led to vacancy for the post of Lambardar in the village. Proceedings to appoint new Lambardar were initiated. After receiving the recommendation, the Collector appointed respondent No.4 as Lambardar on 25.3.2008. He was preferred primarily because he had remained as Sarbrah Lambardar and was having knowledge of the work expected from a Lambardar. The petitioner filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the Commissioner on 19.12.2008. The Financial Commissioner has dismissed the revision on 2.12.2010. The petitioner thereafter approached this Court through the present writ petition.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the appointment of respondent No.4 primarily on the ground that respondent No.4 has made a serious attempt to provide misleading or false information about his date of birth, educational qualification and also the fact that in the meantime, he has been involved in a criminal case, though after the date of his appointment as Lambardar.

(3.) The counsel for the petitioner has referred to the documents, which were relied upon by respondent No.4 to claim his educational qualification. In the school leaving certificate, the date of birth of respondent No.4 is mentioned as 5.9.1972. Copy of this certificate is on record as Annexure P-5. In the date of birth certificate, Annexure P-6, the date of birth of respondent No.4 is mentioned as 1.9.1965. ON this basis, counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner has not even provided correct information about his age. Counsel for the petitioner also claims that the petitioner has better merit as compared to respondent No.4. In any case, he pleads for quashing the appointment of respondent No.4 only on the ground that he has not conducted himself well by giving misleading information about his age as well as about his educational qualification.