IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.1661 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.09.2011 Vinod Kumar …..Appellant Versus State of Haryana and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.Kartar Singh Malik-I, Advocate for the appellant Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) This appeal has been filed against an order passed by the learned Single Judge on 15.7.2011, dismissing CWP No.17440 of 2010, filed by the appellant. As per facts on record, the Collector, to fill up vacancy of a Lambardar in City Rohtak, requisitioned the applications and on getting a report from the lower revenue staff, appointed the respondent No.5, namely, Goverdhan as a Lambardar against the vacancy in question. The appellant went in appeal, which was accepted by the Commissioner vide order dated 20.5.2009, setting aside an order passed by the Collector and appointing the appellant, namely, Vinod Kumar as a Lambardar. Respondent No.5 went in revision, which was accepted by the Financial Commissioner, by observing as under, vide order dated 16.8.2010:- LPA No.1661 of 2011 (O&M) “I have perused the record and the case file. In the order of the Ld. Commissioner the Respondent Sh.Goverdhan has been alleged to have been facing theft case of electricity and hence his appointment as Lambardar held to be perverse. However no grounds for this finding have been given and the finding is non-speaking and lacking in detail. Further, there is merit in the contention of the petitioner that appointing authority for Lambardar is the collector and the orders of the Commissioner dated 20.5.2009 appointing Sh.Vinod Kumar as Lambardar suffer from infirmity. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case I have reached the conclusion that the orders of the Commissioner dated 20.5.2009 deserve to be set aside. Hence the case is remanded to the Collector for deciding the case afresh after evaluating the merits of the case and by giving his specific findings on all the aspects of the case.” It was noted, as a matter of fact, that the order passed by the Commissioner was contrary to the facts on record. It was further opined that in case of an appointment to the post of a Lambardar, the Collector is the best judge. Order passed by the Commissioner was set aside and matter was remitted to the Collector to decide it afresh after evaluating comparative merits of the applicants. At that stage, above said writ petition was filed, which has been dismissed vide the impugned order by the learned Single Judge on 15.7.2011. We feel that the order passed is perfectly justified. Vide the impugned order, the order passed by the Financial Commissioner has been affirmed by the learned Single. It obviously means that the matter will now 2 LPA No.1661 of 2011 (O&M) be re-considered by the Collector on merits and appointment shall be made by taking note of comparative merits of all the candidates. In view of above, no case is made out for interference. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 09.09.2011 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 3