MOHINDER SINGH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged the appointment of respondent No. 4 as Lambardar on the ground that respondent No. 4 has misled the decision making authorities by providing wrong and misleading information.

(2.) THE petitioner, who is an Ex-serviceman, claims to have participated in 1971 War wherein he received the Medals also. He is also recipient of other medals of excellent service. He claims to be popular in the village and economically sound. The petitioner along with respondent No. 4 and four other persons applied for appointment of Harijan Lambardar. The Collector-respondent No. 3 appointed respondent No. 4, which was impugned by the petitioner by way of appeal and revision. Having remained un-successful, he has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) COMMISSIONER , Jalandhar Division declined to interfere in the order only on the ground that no material evidence was led to prove the allegations made in the appeal. The petitioner has placed sufficient material indicating that respondent No. 4 had himself applied for old age pension giving his age to be 66 years. Even the voter list was also shown at the time of arguments to highlight the age of respondent No. 4. The Financial Commissioner declined to interfere on the ground that no new point has been raised. They were expected to see the effect of misleading information provided by respondent No. 4 while seeking appointment as Lambardar.