DULI CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Letters Patent Appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against an order passed by learned Single Bench of this Court on 03.04.2014 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner against the order of the Financial Commissioner on 10.04.2013 remained unsuccessful.

(2.) Babu Ram, Lambardar of village Bata, Tehsil and District Palwal died. In the process of filling up of such vacancy, the District Collector appointed the present appellant as Lambardar vide order dated 25.01.2010. The appeal filed by Suresh was allowed on 14.09.2010 when the matter was remanded to District Collector with the direction to appoint Suresh as Lambardar. The revision filed by the appellant was dismissed on 16.03.2011. At that stage, the appellant herein filed a writ petition before this Court. The learned Single Bench remanded the matter to the District Collector for fresh decision after taking into consideration the Lambardari Rules. In Letters Patent Appeal against the said order, the order was modified and the matter was remanded to the Financial Commissioner. Consequent to the order passed by the Division Bench, the Financial Commissioner has passed an order on 10.04.2013 holding that Suresh Chand is quite suitable for the post of Lambardar and was ordered to be appointed as Lambardar of the said revenue estate. The challenge to the said order has remained unsuccessful before learned Single Bench.

(3.) Still aggrieved, the appellant has filed the present Letters Patent Appeal. It is argued that Suresh has studied up to 5th Class as against the appellant who is 10+2 qualified. Therefore he is a better and suitable candidate for appointment as Lambardar. The said aspect has been considered by learned Financial Commissioner and also the learned Single Bench. The Financial Commissioner noticed that the appellant has been issued two ration cards, one at Fatehabad and another at Palwal, and his name appears in two voter list and thus the conduct of the person is that of fraud on the State Government. There are complaints about the voters list and ration card pending against the appellant. He has rented out his house to the Cooperative Bank in the village and does not reside in the village. Regarding qualification it was mentioned that in the case of appointment, the requirement is that person should be literate preferably Middle Class. Therefore, no adverse notice can be taken regarding respondent being 5th Class pass in comparison to the appellant 10+2 qualified. Since all the aspects have been taken into consideration by the Financial Commissioner while appointing Suresh as Lambardar, and that such order has not been interfered by the learned Single Bench, therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere in the present intra court appeal. It is finding based upon the qualifications of the candidates. There is no violation of any principle of law, which can be said to be unjustified.