IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.10684 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION : JANUARY 20, 2011 RANDHIR SINGH ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER AND PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMETN, HARYNA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. PS Sikand, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Kulvir Narwal, Addl.AG, Haryana. Mr. Surender Dhull, Advocate, for the respondent No.4. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) 1. This Civil Writ Petition has been filed in challenge to order dated 9.3.2010 (Annexure P-3) whereby the case has been remanded back to the Collector with the directions that fresh proceedings be initiated for appointment of Lambardar for Village Patti Afgan, Tehsil and District Kaithal. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there were a number of applicants. Finally, the contest was between the petitioner and respondent No.4. Respondent No.4 filed a revision petition, which has been allowed and the matter has been remanded back. The order of Civil Writ Petition No.10684 of 2010 2 remand is illegal. 3. I have considered the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Operative part of order (Annexure P-3) reads as under:- “After hearing the arguments, I find that Kamal Khushal Singh is not coming out with exact date of birth. Further as per the amended rules notified on 23.12.2008, the person shall not be less than 21 years of age at the time of making application. Obviously it means that a person who is less than 21 years can not be appointed as Lambardar. He was not even 18 years at the time of making initial application. Thus Mr. Kamal Khushal Singh cannot be appointed as Lambardar. However, it would be appropriate that other people of the Patti Afghan be also given chance to apply afresh. The appeal to this extent is partially accepted and case is remanded back to the Collector with the direction that a fresh procedure for appointment of Lambardar be initiated.” 5. A perusal of the above extracted portion of the order indicates that respondent No.4 was not of eligible age, to be considered for the post of Lambardar. The petitioner had already been appointed as Lambardar by the Commissioner, Ambala Division. The Financial Commissioner recorded a confirmed finding that respondent No.4 cannot be appointed as Lambardar in view of his age. 6. In the above circumstances, in view of the fact that there were a number of contesting candidates earlier and respondent No.4 was found to be ineligible, for what reasons the case has been remanded to the Collector is not clear. The contest had been carried to the Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner at the instance of the petitioner and Civil Writ Petition No.10684 of 2010 3 respondent No.4 only. 7. In the absence of reasons for remand, order dated 9.3.2010 (Annexure P-3) is found to not legally tenable. The entire issue of appointment of Lambardar cannot be made open without any plausible reason. 8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Order dated 9.3.2010 (Annexure P-3) is quashed. 9. The parties would appear before the Financial Commissioner on 23.2.2011. The Financial Commissioner is directed to pass fresh orders within three months of receipt of copy of the order, in accordance with law, after taking into account what has been said hereinabove. January 20, 2011 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?