JAGTAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE post of Lambardar of Village Dulchipur fell vacant on the death of the earlier Lambardar. The petitioner and respondent No. 4 applied for the said post. The Tehsildar and SDM Khadoor Sahib, District Tarn Taran recommended respondent No. 4 for the post of Lambardar, which was accepted by respondent No. 4, on the ground that he is more educated and younger in age. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by respondent No. 3 on 6.2.2010 and revision filed before respondent No. 2 was dismissed on 16.2.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is more meritorious than respondent No. 5. The competitive chart is as under: - -

(2.) IT is further submitted that respondent No. 5 does not belong to Sidhu Patti, therefore, he should not have been appointed. During the course of hearing, it is admitted by the counsel for the petitioner that it would hardly make any difference if the petitioner does not belong to the same patti as there is no such bar. Respondent No. 4 does not belong to same patti. As a matter of fact, respondent No. 4 has been the consistent choice of all the revenue officers from Tehsildar to Financial Commissioner. Until and unless any perversity is shown, the choice of the Collector cannot be interfered with.