RATI RAM Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER,HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute relates to appointment of Scheduled Caste Lambardar of village Ram Saran, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra. The applications were invited and the recommendations were made by the authorities in chain for consideration of the Collector. On 01.08.2005, the Collector remitted the case to Sub Divisional Magistrate and obtained report in regard to number of houses of persons belonging to Harijan Community and Balmiki Community. This report revealed that there are 48 houses belong to Balmiki Community whereas Harijan Community has only 12 houses in the village. On receipt of this report, the District Collector considered the recommendations and appointed the petitioner as Lambardar on 29.08.2006. The petitioner belongs to Balmiki community and is having good reputation. He claims that he can read and write. He is ex-serviceman, who has served the Nation. The Commissioner allowed the appeal filed by the respondent, which the petitioner challenged before the Financial Commissioner, who rejected appeal filed by the petitioner. The petitioner, thereafter, has filed the present writ petition before this Court. This Court remanded the case to the Financial Commissioner to decide the same afresh after taking into account the age of the petitioner, educational qualification and the service rendered by him as Ex-serviceman. In compliance with this order, the Financial Commissioner has again held against the petitioner and has upheld the earlier order passed by him.

(2.) The petitioner, accordingly, has approached this Court against the order passed by the Financial Commissioner and would plead that the Financial Commissioner has no jurisdiction to interfere in the choice exercised by the Collector unless it is found to be arbitrary and perverse. As per the counsel, the Financial Commissioner has wrongly invoked his jurisdiction to interfere in the order and in the choice exercised by the Collector by comparing the relative merits, which is the duty of the Collector alone.

(3.) In support, the counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on number of judgments of this Court. Some of these may need a notice here like Darshan Singh Versus Financial Commissioner (Appeals-1), Punjab and others,2009 2 LAR 358, Mohinder Singh Versus Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Punjab and others,2009 2 LAR 360, Sat Pal versus Financial Commissioner, Appeals, Punjab, 2008 149 PunLR 40, Balwant Singh versus State of Haryana and others,2009 2 LAR 160.