JAGAN NATH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON February 11, 2009, the case was adjourned to enable the respondents to file reply. The adjournment was granted subject to payment of Rs. 2000/- as costs. No one appeared before Registrar (Judicial) either to file reply or to deposit the costs. Registrar accordingly placed this case before the Court. No one appears to represent respondent No. 4, who is the affected party, being appointed Lambardar, which is under challenge. Respondent No. 4, however, is present in person and prays for grant of some more time as he was not informed by his counsel about the costs and filing of the reply. This prayer is vehemently opposed by counsel for the petitioner. The prayer made respondent No. 4 is, thus, declined. The parties are heard on merits.

(2.) THE appointment relates to Harijan Lambardar of village Hukran, District Hoshiarpur. 11 candidates initially applied but only two remained for consideration, i.e., the petitioner and respondent No. 4. Considering the relative merits, the Collector appointed respondent No. 4 as Lambardar on 10.10.2001. The petitioner filed an appeal against the same. The plea was that respondent No. 4 had made wrong/misleading statement that he owned 8 acres of land. It is stated that there was no land in his name in the village. Respondent No.4 was also accused of misappropriating Panchayat funds and damaging the property. The Commissioner remanded the case back to the Collector for conducting enquiry to see if respondent No. 4 was having 8 acres land or not.

(3.) WHAT appears to have weighed with the Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner to accept the plea of respondent No. 4 is the fact that the petitioner had remained in jail for 8 months for breach of peace. This fact is seriously disputed by the counsel for the petitioner, who points out that respondent No. 4 had produced no material in support of this allegation made against the petitioner.