IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.1260 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision: 26.07.2011 Dr.Manraj Singh …..Appellant versus State of Punjab and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.Balbir Singh Sewak, Advocate for the appellant Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) C.M. Nos.3513 and 3514 of 2011 In view of reasons mentioned in these applications, which are accompanied by affidavits, the same are allowed, 4 days delay in filing and 15 days delay in re-filing the appeal stands condoned. LPA No.1260 of 2011 Appointment to the post of Lambardar in village Devidaspur, tehsil and district Amritsar is in dispute in this appeal. Appellant and respondent No.4 were the contesting candidates. The Collected appointed the appellant as a Lambardar in the village. Respondent No.4 went in appeal, which was allowed by the Commissioner, by observing as under:- “6. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the record. Both these candidates i.e. the appellants and the respondent have tried to conceal true and material facts from the revenue authorities. The appellant has stated that he had been performing as Lambardar but there is no cogent and material evidence to LPA No.1260 of 2011(O&M) prove this fact. Under what authority he was performing as such is neither established nor proved by the appellant. Similarly, he has miserably failed to lead any convincing material evidence to prove his educational qualification. The respondent is professing as a Doctor at a far off place then the village itself. His availability to the villagers is quite doubtful. In fact, he has intentionally not disclosed this vital information in any document for obvious reasons. The appellant is alleged to be indulged in the preparation of wrong affidavits and further attestation of wrong affidavits/ documents as Lambardar without any valid authority. Therefore, both these candidates are neither fit nor suitable candidates for being considered for appointment as Lambardar of the village. Consequently, the case is remanded back to the District Collector, Amritsar, for conducting fresh mushtari munadi in the village Devidaspura, tehsil and district Amritsar, thereby calling applications from the willing persons from the village, afresh. Therefore, the best eligible and suitable person may be selected and appointed as Lambardar of the village as per procedure and law.” It was noted against both the appellant and respondent No.4 that they had made an attempt to conceal the true facts and accordingly they were found not suitable for the post in question. Appointment of the appellant was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Collector to decide it afresh. The appellant went in revision, which was dismissed by the Financial Commissioner on 30.8.2010. He came to this Court by filing CWP No.1080 of 2011, which was also dismissed vide the impugned order on 20.1.2011. The learned Single Judge noted that the Commissioner has rightly held that both the candidates had incurred disqualification by concealing the material facts. After noting the orders passed by the officers below, it was observed as under:- 2 LPA No.1260 of 2011(O&M) “No doubt, petitioner was appointed as Lambardar by the Collector, however, the Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner on examination of the material on record found that petitioner being a practicing doctor may not be suitable for the post of Lambardar. The Commissioner remanded the case back to the competent authority for a fresh notice inviting applications for appointment of Lambardar. I do not think that the orders impugned are required to be interfered in view of the apprehension expressed by the Commissioner. In any case it is a remand order, however, it is observed that the findings of the Commissioner and Financial Commissioner that petitioner is not a suitable candidate for the post will not come his way, if, choses to again apply. Petitioner is granted liberty to again apply for the post and the competent authority will examine the candidature of the petitioner on the basis of his qualification and suitability.” Liberty was granted to the appellant to apply fresh as and when applications are invited by the Collector. We feel that the order passed is perfectly justified. It has been noted by the officers below that being a doctor, it will not be possible for the appellant to perform duties of Lambardar in an effective manner. We are in agreement with the same. No case is made out for interference. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 26.07.2011 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 3