RAMESH KUMAR Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 5.2.2013 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Financial Commissioner, Haryana-respondent No. 1, upholding the orders dated 26.4.2011 (Annexure P-2) and 24.11.2010 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division and the Collector, Yamuna Nagar, respectively, thereby appointing respondent No. 4 as Lambardar. Facts first.

(2.) Consequent upon the death of late Sh. Raghbir Singh, Lambardar, resident of village Hargarh, Tehsil Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar, one post of Scheduled caste Lambardar fell vacant. Proceedings were initiated to fill up this post. Finally, three candidates remained in fray. Tehsildar, Jagadhari as well as SDO (Civil) Jagadhari, both recommended the name of respondent No. 4 for appointment to the post of Lambardar. Thereafter, after considering, discussing and appreciating merits of all the candidates, Collector, Yamuna Nagar appointed respondent No. 4 as Scheduled Caste Lambardar, vide his order dated 24.11.2010 (Annexure P-3). Dissatisfied, the petitioner filed his appeal before the Commissioner, Ambala Division, which was dismissed vide order dated 26.4.2011 (Annexure P-2) and revision filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by the Financial Commissioner, vide order dated 5.2.2013 (Annexure P-1), upholding the orders passed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division and the District Collector. Hence this writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent revenue authorities have proceeded on an erroneous and misconceived approach, while passing their respective impugned orders. He further submits that the petitioner was better candidate than respondent No. 4. He also submits that better and meritorious candidature of the petitioner was illegally ignored by the respondent revenue authorities. Finally, he prays for allowing the writ petition.