IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Letters Patent Appeal No.1107 of 2010 Date of decision: 7.9.2010 Ajit Singh …..Appellant versus Financial Commissioner (Appeals-II), Punjab and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.Amandeep Singh Manaise, Advocate for the appellant Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) This appeal has been filed to impugne order passed by the learned Single Judge on 6.5.2010, dismissing CWP No.205 of 2009 filed by the appellant. As per records, to fill up a vacancy of Lamberdar in village Babehali, tehsil and district Gurdaspur, applications were invited. The Assistant Collector 1st Grade recommended name of respondent No.4 for appointment as a Lamberdar. The Collector, who is the competent authority, as per provisions of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, after taking note of comparative merits and de-merits of the candidates and also a fact that a case for embezzlement was pending against the appellant and further that even without appointing him as a Lamberdar by any competent authority, he was posing himself as a Lamberdar and became member of Lamberdar Union, rejected claim of the appellant and appointed respondent No.4 as a Lamberdar of the village mentioned above. Letters Patent Appeal No.1107 of 2010 Appellant went in appeal, which was accepted. However, in revision, order passed by the Commissioner was set aside and that of the Collector was restored. The appellant came to this Court by filing CWP No.205 of 2009, which was dismissed vide the impugned judgment. After going through the documents on record and reasons given by the learned Single Judge, we are not inclined to interfere at the instance of the appellant. The Collector has rightly taken an adverse opinion against the appellant on the ground that even before his appointment as such, he had been representing himself as a Lamberdar and became member of the Lamberdar Union. Such like person cannot be appointed against a responsible post. Otherwise also, on merit, there is not a big difference, on the basis of which, the Commissioner could have interfered in the order passed by the Collector. No case is made out to interfere. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 07.09.2010 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 2