SATISH KUMAR Vs. SARDARA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition under Section 16(4) of the Punjab Land Revenue Act 1887 against the order dated 17.4.1999 passed by the Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that after the death of Sh. Ram Asra deceased Lambardar the post fell vacant. The Collector gave permission to fill up the post. A proclamation was made in the village for inviting applications to fill up the post of Lambardar. Satish Kumar, Sardara Singh and Nand Singh applied for the post. After processing their claims, Collector appointed Sh. Sardara Singh as Lambardar vide his order dated 19.2.1985. Aggrieved by this order Satish Kumar filed an appeal before the Commissioner who vide his order dated 24.3.1986 accepted the appeal and remanded the case to the Collector for fresh decision. Collector did not find Satish Kumar and Sardara Singh fit for the post of Lambardar and ordered for fresh proclamation vide his order dated 15.7.87. Against this order, Sardara Singh filed an appeal before the Commissioner, who accepted the appeal vide his order dated 9.11.1987. Against this order both the parties filed review petitions and the same were accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals), Patiala Division, vide his order dated 17.10.1988 with the direction that Collector should verify the facts regarding residence of Sardara Singh, that he is already a Harijan Lambardar, and he is voter of village Farid and associated with a lot of social work in the village. In this regard the SDO(C), Ropar sent a report to the Collector that Sardara Singh is a permanent resident of village Farid. After hearing the parties, the Collector appointed Shri Sardara Singh as Lambardar of the village Farid vide his order dated 11.6.1990. Satish Kumar again filed an appeal in the court of Commissioner, Patiala Division who vide his order dated 31.1.1997 remanded the case with the observation of verifying the issue of resignation given by Sardara Singh from the post of Harijan Lambardar. On scrutiny, the Collector found that Sardara Singh had tendered his resignation on 23.4.1997 from the post of Harijan Lambardar which was not accepted by the then Collector. The Collector, then accepted his resignation from the post of Harijan Lambardar and appointed him as Lambardar (General) of village Farid vide his order dated 18.6.97. Aggrieved by this order Satish Kumar filed an appeal before the Commissioner, who dismissed the same vide his order dated 17.4.1999. Hence this revision petition before this court.

(3.) THE learned counsel for respondent rebutted the contentions of the counsel for the petitioner stating that Sardaras Singh is a permanent resident of the village and was holding the post of Harijan Lambardar of village Farid. He is the voter of village and also associated with social work in the village. He further stated that in the case of hereditary claim Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the Court in the case of "Karnal Singh v. State of Haryana", 1973 PLJ 676 has held that rule 17(ii) may seem to make discrimination or distinction on the ground of hereditary or family connection. This rule may, therefore, appear to be violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Artilces 14, 15 and 16 of Constitution of India. He further cited 2000(4) R.C.R.(Civil) 492 : 2000(2) PLJ 595 in the case of "Bishan Dass v. Commissioner Jalandhar Division". The Financial Commissioner Revenue Punjab has held that Collector's order, where it does not suffer from any infirmity, should be upheld and choice of Collector should not be interfered with lightly. The petitioner lives in village Sheikhpura and is running a shop of Commission Agent at Bella and is not available to the people of village Farid for his service as Lambardar. Sardara Singh has good reputation in the area as well as in the village. His two sons are in Govt. of India's services including Defence Services. In the cases of Lambardari, the factor of service to the nation weighs in favour of a candidate. The Collector had appointed Sardara Singh as Lambardar of village Farid considering his merits. The Commissioner had also upheld the order of Collector and dismissed by the appeal filed by the present petitioner.