JASPINDER SINGH Vs. HARNEK SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present is a revision petition under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, against the order dated 24.11.1995, passed by the Commissioner, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur, in a Lambardari case.

(2.) THE brief facts of this case are, that, after the death of Ranjit Singh, Lambardar of Village Khunde Halal, Tehsil Muktsar, District Faridkot (now tehsil and district Muktsar) on 4.5.1992, proclamation was made in the Village for inviting applications from the desirous candidates, to fill up the vacancy. In response to this proclamation, among others, Jaspinder Singh, Harnek Singh and Pirthi Singh son of Ranjit Singh, had submitted their applications. Pirthi Singh father of Harnek Singh had submitted his application on 26.4.1993 but had withdrawn the same on 13.8.1993, by stating, that, because of his domestic engagements, he was not interested in becoming a Lambardar. In fact, in the meantime, Pirthi Singh was appointed as Lambardar by the District Collector against the second vacancy, in the Village. After considering the comparative merits of the close contentants namely, Jaspinder Singh and Harnek Singh, the Naib-Tehsildar and the Tehsildar Muktsar, had recommended the name of Harnek Singh, to the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), for his appointment as Lambardar. However, the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Muktsar, in his report dated 14.12.1993 had dissented, and, had recommended the name of Jaspinder Singh, for appointment as Lambardar, to the District Collector, by observing that, Jaspinder Singh was a better candidate and more suitable for the post, because his ownership of land in the Village was double than that of the land owned by Harnek Singh that the Gram Panchayat in its resolution had supported the appointment of Jaspinder Singh, and moreover, because Pirthi Singh, father of Harnek Singh had already been appointed as Lambardar against another vacancy; so, the appointment of two persons as Lambardar, from the same family is likely to invite flak from the public. The Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil) had also observed, that the father and the son, if both appointed as Lambardar, there was likelihood of misuse of the post of Lambardar. In his aforementioned report, the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil) had recorded that, Jaspinder Singh owned 13 Acres 4 Kanals and 9 Marlas of land in the Village; had studied upto 8th standard and was 37 years of age; the other candidate Harnek Singh, owned 6 Acres 3 Kanal and 17 Marlas of land in the Village; had failed in the tenth Class examination and was aged 32 years.

(3.) THE learned counsel for both the parties have been heard. After careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and after thorough perusal of the record, I am of the view, that the present revision petition has a merit, and the same deserves to be accepted, and the petitioner- Jaspinder Singh, needs to be appointed as Lambardar.