C.W.P No.18274 of 2008 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. C.W.P No.18274 of 2008 Date of Decision: 22.10.2008 Balwinder Singh ....Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr.Justice J.S. Khehar Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Vijay Rana, Advocate for the petitioner. ... J.S. Khehar, J. (Oral). The petitioner, who was appointed as Chowkidar, was dismissed by the District Collector, Jalandhar, by an order dated 1.2.2001 (Annexure P-4). The aforesaid order was passed after a show cause notice had been issued to the petitioner and his reply had been obtained. Consequent upon the passing of the order dated 1.2.2001, the petitioner preferred an appeal. Although, in the first instance, the Appellate Authority remanded the matter back yet eventually, the Appellate Authority upheld the order of removal of the petitioner from the post of Chowkidar by an order dated 21.10.2004 (Annexure P-8). Dissatisfied with the order of the Appellate Authority dated 21.10.2004, the petitioner filed a revision petition before the Financial Commissioner, Animal Husbandry, Punjab, with the C.W.P No.18274 of 2008 2 delay of 1016 days. Irrespective of the delay, the revisional authority, while dismissing the petition filed before him, vide order dated 21.11.2007, recorded the following observations in so far as the merits of the claim of the petitioner, were concerned:- “Even on merits the case of the petitioner is extremely weak. He does not dispute that he verified a sale-deed executed by the holder of General Power of Attorney of a person who had died two months before the execution of the sale-deed. His defence is that he had only identified the parties and had said nothing about the actual land owner Buta Ram who had died before the execution of the sale-deed. As rightly observed by the District Collector in his order there are only two possibilities one that the petitioner had deliberately hidden the fact of Buta Ram’s death or that despite being the Lamberdar of village, he was not aware of the fact that Buta Ram had died. In either case he is shown as a person unworthy of continuing as Lamberdar of the village. The petition therefore fails and is hereby dismissed.” During the course of hearing, while responding to the queries made by the Bench, learned counsel for the petitioner acknowledged that the vendor as well as, the vendee belonged to the village of the petitioner. He also acknowledged that the General Power of Attorney also belonged to the village of the petitioner. In the background of the acknowledged factual position, we find no infirmity in the observations recorded by the Financial Commissioner, Animal Husbandry, Punjab, in the impugned order dated 21.11.2007 (Annexure P-11). For the reasons recorded hereinabove, the instant writ petition C.W.P No.18274 of 2008 3 being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. ( J.S. Khehar ) Judge ( Nirmaljit Kaur ) Judge. 22.10.2008 sk.