MOHINDER SINGH Vs. HARNEK SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed under Section 13 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 against order dated 7.10.2003 passed by the Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar vide which he set aside the order dated 24.6.2003 of the District Collector, Kapurthala.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that on the death of Pritam Singh, lambardar of village Mohke, the process to fill up the vacancy was initiated. In response to the proclamation, 13 candidates applied for the post. The Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Sultanpur Lodhi recommended the name of Mohinder Singh whereas the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sultanpur Lodhi first recommended the name of Mohinder Singh s/o deceased lambardar for appointment as lambardar. However on remand by the Collector, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate vide his recommendation dated 10.3.2003 recommended the name of Harnek Singh for appointment as lambardar. This recommendation was made on the basis of better merits of Harnek Singh as compared to Mohinder Singh. Before the Collector, Kapurthala only three candidates namely Harnek Singh, Mohinder Singh and Kuldip Singh appeared. On the basis of comparative merits, the Collector appointed Mohinder Singh as lambardar vide his order dated 24.6.2003. The order was challenged by Harnek Singh before the Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar who accepted the appeal and vide impugned order dated 7.10.2003 and appointed Harnek Singh as lambardar, necessitating the present appeal by Mohinder Singh.

(3.) ON the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent has argued that the hereditary claim has been held to ultra vires vide ruling cited as 1973 PLJ 677. However, the land holding is not a major factor for deciding such cases, as held in 1998(2) PLR 428, in view of the fact that the land revenue in the State has since been abolished. The ownership of the land is merely to fulfil the requirement of the Rules and not as a guarantee against the payment of land revenue. He has drawn attention of this court to para-10 of the order of the Collector which refers to the distinct merits of respondent Harnek Singh. The respondent is a social worker and takes part in the social activities. He is acquainted with the duties of lambardar. He has passed NCC examination and is a progressive dairy farmer. He has better educational qualification and hence, there is no perversity attached to the order of the learned Commissioner which is required to be upheld.