JAGDISH SINGH Vs. JAGIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 against the order dated 10.3.2005 passed by the Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar.

(2.) IT pertains to the lambardari of village Jhingla, Tehsil Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur where where on the death of Sh. Sansar Singh previous lambardar of village, process to fill up the vacancy was started. Proclamation was made in the village for calling applications from the interested and eligible persons of the village. In response, five candidates applied for the said post including present petitioner and the respondent. Tehsildar, Mukerian and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mukerian, recommended the name of the respondent Jagir Singh and forwarded the case to District Collector, Hoshiarpur, who after hearing the parties and going through the merits of the candidates, appointed Jagdish Singh present petitioner as lambardar vide his order dated 10.6.2004. Against this order, Jagir Singh present respondent filed appeal before the Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar who accepted the same and reversed the order of District Collector by appointing Jagir Singh as Lambardar of village Jhingla as a suitable candidate. Now revision has been filed before this court.

(3.) COUNSEL for the respondent put forth arguments and also submitted in his written arguments that Tehsildar and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mukerian recommended the name of Jagir Singh respondent but District Collector, Hoshiarpur appointed Jagdish Singh as lambardar by ignoring the merits of the respondent Jagir Singh. He was more matured person of about 64 years. He was an ex-Army Officer, retired as Honorary Capt., more educated, received number of certificates from the Army during his service. He owned more land. The allegations levelled by the petitioner that respondent was in illegal possession of Gram Panchayat Land were totally false and frivolous. Commissioner had appointed him being more meritorious. Counsel for the respondent relied upon the following citations/judgements :