Major Singh vs Divisional Commissioner, Patiala and others

Ranjit Singh, J.—The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Collector and upheld by the Commissioner appointing respondent No. 3 as Lambardar of the village. The post of Lambardar in the village fell vacant on the death of earlier Lambardar Kartar Singh. The petitioner and respondent No. 3 applied for being appointed as Lambardar. The petitioner claims to be having a better merit being a grand-son of the deceased Lambardar. The Collector accordingly decided to appoint him on 27.11.2007. Respondent No. 3 filed an appeal against this order and the Divisional Commissioner set-aside the order passed by the Collector on 9.6.2009 and remanded the case back to the Collector for a fresh decision. The petitioner did not raise any challenge to the order passed by the Commissioner. When the matter went before the Collector again, he has appointed respondent No. 3 as Lambardar, which the petitioner would term as illegal and without any legal justification. The petitioner filed an appeal against the same which has been dismissed and he has accordingly filed this writ petition before this court to impugn the order passed by the Collector and upheld by the Commissioner.

The Collector noticed the various contentions raised on behalf of the parties. The petitioner is 36 years old, whereas respondent No. 3, who has been appointed, is 48 years old. The Collector has accordingly found that respondent No. 3 is more educated and has a more experience in life and, thus, decided to appoint respondent No. 3 as Lambardar. The view formed by the Collector does not suffer from any perversity or illegality to call for interference. The counsel could not point out any such thing in the impugned order which may require interference. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.