ABDUL LATIF Vs. RAM CHANDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed under section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 against the order dated 9.6.1999 passed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala and for restoration of order dated 4.8.1998 passed by the Collector, Yamunanagar vide which appellant was appointed lambardar.

(2.) FACTS in brief of this case are that a post of backward class lambardar was created for village Araianwala, Tehsil Chhachhrauli, District Yamunanagar in view of the population of backward class. Process to fill this post was started on 11.3.1998 and munadi was done in the village through the halqa patwari as per rules. Munandi was done on 16.4.1998. Two applications were received in response to this munadi, i.e. one of Sh. Abdul Latif son of Mahmood Hassan and another of Mohd. Iqbal son of Ali Nawaz resident of village Araianawala. Mohd. Iqbal withdrew his application and only Abdul Latif remained for consideration whose character antecedents were got verified from the police and revenue authorities. Tehsildar Chhachhrauli recommended his candidature to Sub Divisional Officer (C) who also after hearing the candidate forwarded the case to Collector, Yamunanagar. Collector, Yamunanagar after going through the record and hearing appointed him lambardar of backward class on 4.8.1998. Against this order of the Collector Ram Chander filed an appeal in the court of Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala, who vide his order dated 9.6.1999 accepted the appeal. Ld. Commissioner had given a clear finding that in the report of munadi no date has been mentioned nor it has been signed by respected person or lambardar of the village. I have gone through the record. Finding of the Ld. Commissioner is incorrect as date of munadi has been recorded by the chowkidar in the report which is 16.4.1998 and the same has been signed by patwari. This munadi was done in pursuance of Tehsildar's order dated 1.4.98 from which it is apparent that Abdul Latif had given an application to the Collector that he should be appointed as a Lambardar. The Collector gave permission for appointment of Lambardar from Backward class but it was clearly ordered by the Tehsildar that munadi should be done and which was done on 16.4.1998 and time was given upto 1.5.98 to file applications. Only two persons applied for the post of lambardar namely Abdul Latif and Mohd. Iqbal. Mohd. Iqbal withdrew his application in favour of Abdul Latif. S.D.O. (C) recommended the name of Abdul Latif and the Collector after applying her mind and considering all the circumstances of the case and the merit of the candidates, appointed Abdul Latif as Lambardar. The present petitioner was not a party at that stage. The Ld. Commissioner had mentioned that chaukidar is related to the petitioner but there is no evidence on the record to prove that any relationship existed between the chaukidar and the petitioner. Findings of the Ld. Commissioner on which he gave his judgment are not based on facts, therefore, I set aside the order passed by him and uphold the decision of the Collector. To be communicated. Appeal allowed.