IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.10874 of 2011 Bhup Singh ...Petitioner Versus Financial Commissioner, Revenue, Haryana, Chandigarh & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr.Kul Bhushan Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner, who was a candidate for appointment as Harijan Lambardar, has approached this court to challenge the order passed by the Collector and upheld by the Commissioner and Financial Commissioner, who has declined the claim of the petitioner and has appointed Mahi Pal as the Lambardar. As per the settled position of law, it is the discretion of the Collector, which is material. The Collector has appointed respondent-Mahi Pal as Lambardar by considering his young age and he being literate being matriculate. Respondent-Mahi Pal had also contributed towards family planning and had cooperated in the Government functioning by depositing `30,000/- in the small saving scheme. It has consistently been held that as a general rule, choice of Collector is final and except where the order discloses the lack of jurisdiction or an error of fact, so as to render his order arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable, no interference would be called for. See Ujagar Singh Versus State of Punjab, 2008(3) RCR (Civil) 28 and Gurdial Singh Versus Iqbal Singh, 2008(4) RCR (Civil) 283. Accordingly, the choice of the Collector is to be treated Civil Writ Petition No.10874 of 2011 : 2 : as final. No submission is made to show lack of jurisdiction or error of fact or arbitrariness, which would call for interference in the choice exercised by the Collector. No case for interference, therefore, is made out. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. July 04, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE