IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.10056 of 2011 Date of Decision: June 01, 2011 Dharam Pal .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Haryana & others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. A.K. Singh Goyat, Advocate, for the petitioner. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. The issue of appointment of Lambardar for village Rajli, Tehsil & District Hissar, has been raised on the ground that petitioner is more literate than respondent No.5, Sube Singh. 2. I have considered the contention of learned counsel. 3. At page 36 of the paperbook, in the order of Collector (Annexure P-1, dated 28.2.2007), it has been mentioned that the petitioner was involved in a criminal case for commission of an offence under Sections 379/ 430 IPC registered with Police CWP No.10056 of 2011 [2] Station, Barwala. Under the circumstances, the petitioner has not been found to be suitable to serve as Lambardar. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to draw attention of the Court towards any portion of the order (Annexure P-1) passed by Collector wherein any such demerit has been found to be attached to the case of respondent No.5. 5. In view of the fact that petitioner was involved in a criminal case, he might be eligible to compete for the post of Lambardar, but surely is not suitable to be appointed as such. The Financial Commissioner, in other impugned order dated 22.3.2011 (Annexure P-3) has returned the finding on the said premises. Respondent No.5, in the said circumstances, would make a better choice for appointment as Lambardar. 6. No ground for judicial review of impugned orders, in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction is made out. 7. The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) June 01, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?