IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.21162 of 2011 Date of decision : 16.11.2011 Nazar Singh ....Petitioner Versus Divisional Commissioner, Patiala and another ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr. J.S.Bhandohal, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. The petitioner impugns the order dated 7.4.2011 vide which his plea of being appointed as a Lambardar has been rejected in preference to the candidature of respondent No.2 Jaspal Singh. The grievance of the petitioner is that the related merits and demerits of the petitioner and respondent No.2 have not been adequately assessed and that the Commissioner has wrongly taken the petitioner to be an encroacher on the panchayat land whereas there is no material to substantiate such a plea. He has referred to collateral material on record to show that the villagers had testified to the falsity of the allegations of the petitioner being an encroacher. On appraisal of the material on record, it transpires that the petitioner was earlier elected as a Panch but a complaint was initiated against him pursuant to which he was suspended and the allegations against him were that he had unauthorisedly encroached upon the C.W.P.No.21162 of 2011 -2- panchayat land and had cultivated the same. The demarcation report affirmed this fact. Subsequently, however, the petitioner vacated the possession of the panchayat land and was reinstated. Learned counsel for the petitioner would have this Court to believe that the effect of the order and the misdemeanour of the petitioner stood washed off once he had vacated the panchayat land. Indeed, this argument would have been palatable to the Court but the question still remains that at the time of evaluation of the claim and rival claim at the time of appointment of a Lambardar if a person is having an unblemished record as juxtaposed against a person who has a tendency to violate the law and encroach upon panchayat property, then in the considered opinion of the Court such a conduct becomes a relevant factor to discard a person from the process of appointment of a Lambardar more so when upon evaluation the rival claimant has an unblemished record. Besides, it is a settled principle of law that the choice made by the Collector would not ordinarily be interfered with unless such a choice reflects perversity and arbitrariness. None of these factors being visible, the instant petition is held to be without any merit and is dismissed. 16.11.2011 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss