KABUL SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER the death of Shri Issar Singh, the previous Lambardar of Village Saharanwas, Tehsil and District Rewari a proclamation was made in the Village on 23.2.2004 inviting applications for appointment of Lambardar from interested persons. Three persons, namely, Kabul Singh (petitioner), Khub Lal (respondent No. 4) and Sunil Kumar (respondent No. 5) applied for the post. On the basis of the material placed on record the Tehsildar recommended the name of Kabul Singh (petitioner) for appointment as Lambardar. The Assistant Collector-cum-SDM after going through the material on record also recommended the name of the petitioner for appointment as Lambardar. The petitioner appeared before the Collector, District Rewari (respondent No. 3) on 6.7.2004. Respondents No. 4 and 5, it is stated, did not appear before the Collector (respondent No. 3). Accordingly, the Collector (respondent No. 3) vide order dated 6.7.2004 (Annexure-P.1) appointed the petitioner as Lambardar of the village finding him to be most suitable. Aggrieved against the order dated 6.7.2004 (Annexure-P.1), Khub Lal (respondent No. 4) filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Gurgaon Division, Gurgaon (respondent No. 2). The Commissioner vide his order dated 23.11.2006 (Annexure-P.2) set aside the order dated 6.7.2004 (Annexure-P.1) passed by the District Collector, Rewari. The Commissioner in his order dated 23.11.2006 (Annexure-P.2) observed that Khub Lal (respondent No. 4) had experience of the work of Lambardar as he was son of deceased Lambardar. Besides, he is an ex-serviceman and more literate than Kabul Singh (petitioner). Khub Lal (respondent No. 4), it was observed, had 7.5 acres of land and his economic condition in relation to Kabul Singh (petitioner) was very good. Besides, it was observed that an ex-serviceman is to be given preference for the post of Lambardar. Accordingly, Khub Lal (respondent No. 4) was appointed as Lambardar. The petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 23.11.2006 (Annexure-P.2) passed by the Commissioner, Gurgaon Division filed a revision petition under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 before the Financial Commissioner, Haryana. The learned Financial Commissioner after going through the evidence and material on record vide order dated 27.1.2009 (Annexure-P.3) observed that Kabul Singh (petitioner) though was younger in age but Khub Lal (respondent No.4) was physically fit and could discharge functions of the Lambardar effectively. Besides, it was observed that Khub Lal (respondent No.4) being son of the Lambardar would be well versed with the functioning of the post of Lambardar. It was also observed that Khub Lal (respondent No.4) was an ex-serviceman who is to be given preference in the matter of appointment. The petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 27.1.2009 (Annexure-P.3) passed by the learned Financial Commissioner has filed the present petition.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is more suitable than respondent No. 4 for appointment as Lambardar. It is submitted that respondent No. 4 is suffering from tuberculosis. A reference has been made to the certificate dated 17.8.2006 (Annexure-P.4). Besides, it is submitted that respondent No. 4 is 72 years of age whereas the petitioner is 44 years of age. It is also submitted that respondent No. 4 is in illegal possession of 2 Kanals 2 Marlas of land of the panchayat. A reference has been made to the copy of demarcation report dated 4.12.2005 (Annexure-P.5). It is also submitted that Khub Lal (respondent No. 4) himself had not appeared before the Collector and, therefore, was not considered and has rendered himself ineligible for consideration.

(3.) FOR the appointment of the Village Headman Rule 15 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules (as applicable in Haryana) ('Rules' - for short) provides for matters to be considered in first appointment. Rule 15 reads as under :-