HARMINDER SINGH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present writ petition is directed against the order dated 21.04.2016 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Financial Commissioner, Punjab, whereby he upheld the order dated 03.07.2015 (Annexure P-4) passed by Commissioner, Rupnagar Division, Rupnagar and also the order dated 15.07.2013 (Annexure P- 3) passed by District Collector, Rupnagar, vide which respondent No.4 was appointed as Lambardar.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was much better placed candidate for the post of Lambardar than respondent No.4. The respondent authorities have proceeded on a wholly misconceived approach, while passing the impugned orders. The comparative merits of both the candidates were not appreciated in the correct perspective. He refers to a communication dated 23.12.2014 (Annexure P-8), to contend that Forest Department imposed fine on the father of respondent No.4 for illegally cutting some trees, which reflects against him. So far as the attachment of the land owned by father of the petitioner was concerned, that had been got redeemed by the petitioner much before passing of the impugned order by the District Collector. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on three judgments of this Court in Darshan Singh Vs. Financial Commissioner (appeals I), Punjab and others, 2009 (4) RCR (Civil) 387, Pishora Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others, 2015 (2) RCR (Civil) 344 and Major Singh Vs. Financial Commissioner Revenue, Punjab and others, 2016 (2) RCR (Civil) 663. He prays for setting aside the impugned orders, by allowing the present writ petition.

(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner at considerable length, careful perusal of the record of the case and giving thoughtful consideration to the contentions raised, this Court is of the considered opinion that all the three impugned orders contained in Annexures P-3, P-4 and P-5 passed by the revenue authorities deserve to be upheld, because the same have been found based on cogent findings, which are duly supported by sound reasons. Writ petition having been found without any merit, is liable to be dismissed.