MUKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant prays for setting aside order dated 17.08.2012 whereby the writ petition filed by respondent No.4 Harpal Singh was allowed thereby restoring order dated 18.08.2009 (Annexure P1) passed by the Collector, Yamuna Nagar, Haryana, with regard to appointment of Harpal Singh respondent No.4 as Lambardar of village Sabapur, Tehsil Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar.

(2.) Counsel for the appellant submits that Mukesh Kumar is more meritorious viz-a-viz respondent Harpal Singh. The Collector illegally took into consideration the hereditary claim of the respondent and appointed him as Lambardar of the village. The order passed by the Collector was rightly set aside in appeal by the Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala. The order passed by the Commissioner was rightly affirmed by the Financial Commissioner, Haryana. The learned Single Judge has erred in setting aside the order passed by the Commissioner and upholding the appointment of the contesting respondent by restoring the illegal order passed by the Collector.

(3.) Counsel for the contesting respondent submits that the Collector appointed Harpal Singh on a detailed and minute appraisal of the comparitive merits of contesting candidates. The choice of the Collector is to be honoured unless there is any patent error, illegality or infirmity in the choice of the Collector. The Commissioner, without pointing out any defect in the order of the Collector, set aside the decision of the Collector and substituted his own decision by considering the merits of contesting candidates, which is not permissible in law. The Financial Commissioner failed to discern this error and wrongly affirmed the order passed by the Commissioner.