SAJJAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that against the order of remand of the matter by the Commissioner to the District Collector vide order dated 24.07.2014 (Amnnexure P-2), revision petition filed under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act has been allowed by the Financial Commissioner vide order dated 24.08.2016 whereby the order of the Collector accepting the appointment of Mange Ram, has been upheld.

(2.) Mr. Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the finding rendered by the Financial Commissioner qua the certificate for the purpose of appointment as Lambardar was erroneously found to be false whereas there is no reference of the same in the order of District Collector or Commissioner's order. It was never the case. The qualification for the appointment of Lambardar is 8 th pass and the certificate of 10th and 12th obtained from the Board of Secondary Education,Madhya Bharat, Gwalior is inconsequential. The petitioner is younger than the appointed candidate as he is 37 years of age and his father was also working as Lambardar.For Subsequent orders see LPA-2408-2017 He has done certain social works which have not been noticed, thus, the order under challenge, even after remand, lacks reasons, much less, application of mind, thus, liable to be set aside.

(3.) Notice of motion.