NARESH KUMAR Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant writ petition is direct against the order dated 6.1.2015 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, whereby revision filed by respondent No. 3 was allowed, setting aside the order dated 31.3.2010 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division and restoring the order dated 7.1.2010 (Annexure P-1) passed by the District Collector, Ambala, appointing respondent No.3 as Lambardar.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was as better placed candidate than respondent No.3 for the post of Lambardar Petitioner is 10th class pass whereas respondent No. 3 has studied up to 8th class. So far as criminal case against the petitioner is concerned, he had been acquitted of the criminal charge. He further submits that since the District Collector failed to appreciate the comparative merit of both the candidates, while passing the impugned order, it was rightly set aside by the Commissioner but the learned Financial Commissioner misdirected himself, while passing the impugned order Annexure P-3 and that too without recording sufficient reasons. He prays for setting aside the impugned orders passed by the Financial Commissioner, by allowing the present writs petition.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at considerable length, after careful perusal of record of the case and givings thoughtful consideration to the contentions raised, this Court is of the considered opinion that since the impugned order is based on true facts ands has been passed in accordance with law, the same deserves to be upheld.s The writ petition is misconceived which is liable to be dismissed.