IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.3724 of 2011 Date of Decision: March 03, 2011 Gurmel Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. H.C. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This civil writ petition has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing Order dated 25.8.2010 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Financial Commissioner, Punjab. 2. Gist of the matter is that Lambardar for village Ralla, Tehsil & District Mansa, was to be appointed. While the Collector directed appointment of respondent No.2, Jagjit Singh, vide Order dated 24.9.2007 (Annexure P-3), CWP No.3724 of 2011 [2] the Commissioner, Faridkot Division, Faridkot, vide Order dated 30.9.2009 (Annexure P-4) accepted the appeal filed by petitioner Gurmel Singh and directed appointment of the petitioner. Respondent No.2, Jagjit Singh went up in appeal before the Financial Commissioner. Vide Order Annexure P-5, the appeal has been accepted and respondent No.2, Jagjit Singh has been directed to be appointed as Lambardar while upholding order dated 24.9.2007 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Collector, and setting aside Order dated 30.9.2009 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Commissioner. 3. It is an admitted fact that while in Army, the petitioner was awarded sentence for 10 days for some mis-conduct. Other than that, the petitioner has been found to be guilty of serious mis-demeanour as after his removal as Lambardar, petitioner kept on signing the documents in the Tehsil in the capacity of Lambardar. The documents are registered documents. 4. The case of respondent No.2 does not suffer from any such demerit. 5. No ground for interference is made out because this Court finds the reasons assigned by the Financial Commissioner in accepting the CWP No.3724 of 2011 [3] appeal filed by respondent No.2 to be good. The petitioner was not a Lambardar and yet continued to sign and attest the documents as Lambardar which tantamounts to serious misconduct. 6. The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) March 03, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?