TEHAL SINGH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two brothers are fighting hard to get an appointment of Lambardar of a Village on account of the same having been left by their father due to his old age. Bachan Singh, father of the petitioner and respondent No. 4, gave an affidavit that because of his old age, he can not continue as Lambardar and in his place his son, i.e., the petitioner be appointed as Lambardar. It is stated that the petitioner had been helping his father in carrying out duties.

(2.) THE process of appointing the Lambardar was accordingly initiated. Munadi was effected and only the petitioner applied. After the last date of receipt of application, respondent No. 4, brother of the petitioner, also gave an application. Pointing out to the age of respondent No. 4 being 75 years, the petitioner seems to be objecting to the filing of application by his elder brother. Collector ignored the age and has appointed respondent No. 4 as Lambardar.

(3.) THE main Planck of attack against the impugned order is the late receipt of application of respondent No. 4. Plea is that it could not have been entertained. It is briefly disclosed in the writ petition that munadi was effected in the village and the petitioner was the only one who had applied. It is even not mentioned as to what was the last date of the receipt of the applications. It is then averred that respondent No. 4 gave an application for appointment, when the date had expired.