HARBHAJAN SINGH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant writ petition the petitioner has impugned the order passed by the Financial Commissioner Appeals-I, Punjab, dated 12.7.2007 whereby the revision petition preferred by the petitioner challenging the appointment of Jaspal Singh respondent No.4, has been dismissed.

(2.) The solitary contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that although the petitioner himself is engaged as wood contractor yet respondent No.4 Jaspal Singh is also employed as a Salesman at village Grewal, which is at a distance of two kilo meters from the village. In so far as the instant contention is concerned, the attention of this Court has been invited to the submissions noticed in the order dated 9.5.2000 passed by the Collector, Rupnagar.

(3.) Although the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is correct, namely, that respondent No.4 Jaspal Singh is also employed, yet it is apparent from the order dated 9.5.2000 passed by the Collector, Rupnagar, that the employment of respondent No.4- Jaspal Singh is seasonal and pertains only to selling fertilizer, whereas, the petitioner is a wood contractor, admittedly, remains out of the village for most of the time, in connection with his business. Besides the aforesaid, it is also apparent, that respondent No.4 Jaspal Singh possesses higher qualifications than the petitioner Harbhajan Singh. Accordingly, we are of the view that the Financial Commissioner Appeals-1, Punjab, was fully justified in choosing Jaspal Singh respondent No.4 as Lambardar in preference to the petitioner.