IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.11832 of 2011 Udey Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. Respondent No.4 was appointed as Lambardar by the Collector assessing the comparative merit of the four candidates under consideration. The petitioner filed an appeal against the same and the Commissioner set-aside the order of the Collector and appointed the petitioner in place of respondent No.4. Respondent No.4 thereafter approached the Financial Commissioner, who has set-aside the order passed by the Commissioner on the ground that as per law, the choice of the Collector is final and can be interfered with only when there is lack of jurisdiction or an error of fact so as to render his order arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable. Finding that there was no perversity or unreasonableness in the view taken by the Collector, the Financial Commissioner has restored the order passed by the Collector. There was not much justification by the Commissioner to interfere in the order passed by the Collector. The Financial Commissioner is accordingly fully justified in law and has rightly interfered in the order passed by the Collector. No case for interference in the writ petition is made out. Dismissed. July 12, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE