DEVINDER SHARMA Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question involved in this case is "whether the choice of Collector in appointment of the Lambardar, who is a regular government employee and likely to be absent from the village on account of his official work, can be interfered with by the Commissioner or the Financial Commissioner". The skeletal facts of the case are that the post of Lambardar fell vacant due to death of Shri Desh Raj Lambardar of village Agawanpur. In order to fill up the said vacancy, publication was done on 17.01.2008 which could attract 7 applications. After the preliminary inquiry, Tehsildar, Gannaur and SDO(C), Gannaur recommended the case of the petitioner to the Collector for appointment who, vide his order dated 19.01.2011, appointed the petitioner as Lambardar. The said order was challenged by respondent No. 4 before the Commissioner, Rohtak Division, Rohtak, but he did not interfere in the choice of the Collector and dismissed the appeal vide order dated 06.04.2012. Respondent No. 4 then filed revision petition before the Financial Commissioner which has been accepted vide order dated 23.05.2013.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner has submitted that after his appointment as Lambardar on 19.01.2011, the petitioner has been working as such but respondent No. 1 has committed a patent error in upsetting the choice of Collector only on the ground that the petitioner is in regular government service and would not be available to discharge his duties as Lambardar. It is submitted that respondent No. 1 has categorically observed that the petitioner, being a government servant, is not ineligible for consideration for appointment as Lambardar as such a person has a full right to contest for the post of Lambardar being eligible as per Rules, but still respondent No. 4 has been appointed though the petitioner is a Postgraduate and more meritorious then respondent No. 4. He has also submitted that the choice of the Collector can be interfered only in case of any perversity and not on the basis of their respective merits.

(3.) BEFORE adverting to the facts of the case, I may highlight the scheme of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules (as applicable to Haryana) [hereinafter referred to as the "Rules"]. Rule 15 lays down the parameters to be considered in the case of first appointment of Lambardar belonging to General category. Rule 19 relates to the appointment of Revenue farmers and mortgagees as Lambardar and Rule 19 -B deals with the circumstances required to be considered at the time of appointment of Lambardar of reserved category. The duties of Lambardar are laid down in Rule 20, who could be dismissed from service in terms of Rule 16 of the Rules.