BABITA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cm No.488-LPA of 2015

(2.) Appellant impugns the order dated 1.12.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby Civil Writ Petition No.887 of 2014 preferred by respondent No.4 against the order dated 9.1.2014 (Annexure P-3) rendered by the Financial Commissioner setting-aside his appointment as Lambardar, has been allowed.

(3.) The post of Lambardar fell vacant in Village Teent, District Rewari on the demise of Raghubir Singh Lambardar. Steps were taken to fill up the said post. After completing the formalities, Assistant Collector 2nd Grade recommended name of the appellant Babita wife of Rattan Singh and forwarded her case to the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, who submitted recommendation in favour of Ramesh Kumar-respondent No.4 to the Collector. Vide order dated 29.7.2010, Collector-respondent No.3 appointed respondent No.4 as Lambardar against the post finding him meritorious. The aforementioned order was assailed by the appellant by filing an appeal before the Commissioner, Gurgaon Division. Vide order dated 14.7.2011, the Commissioner dismissed the appeal. Revision petition, i.e., ROR No.19 of 2011-2012 was preferred before the Financial Commissioner by invoking the provisions of Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887. The Financial Commissioner, on the basis of the material on record, found that respondent No.4 was defaulter of electricity bill of Rs. 25,734/- and, this being one of the disqualifications, he could not have been appointed as Lambardar, hence, set-aside the orders of the Collector and the Commissioner. As noticed above, the aforementioned order was assailed by respondent No.4 being writ petitioner. The writ petition, as indicated above, has been allowed and, hence, the present Letters Patent Appeal.