IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 14312 of 2011 Date of Decision: 08.08.2011 Ramesh Kumar ...Petitioner Versus The Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana and others ..Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: Mr. S.K.Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ALOK SINGH J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that Divisional Commissioner vide order dated 13.03.2009 (Annexure P/3) has observed that from a perusal of the record, it reveals that proceedings for appointment of Lambardar were initiated on the application of Naresh Kumar, respondent No.4 herein, however, thereafter Naresh Kumar was shown absent; Naresh Kumar objected that on 26.05.2005, learned Assistant Collector IInd Grade had shown him absent wrongly while he was not informed about the date fixed, i.e., 26.5.2005. Learned Commissioner has further held that absence of Naresh Kumar, on whose application proceedings were initiated, seems to be doubtful. He has further observed that in the present case, munadi was not done in proper manner and sufficient time was not granted to move application for the post of Lambardar, therefore, the order passed by the Collector was set-aside and it was ordered that proceedings for appointment of Lambardar be initiated afresh after fresh proclamation. The order of Divisional Commissioner (Annexure P/3) was affirmed by Financial Commissioner vide order dated 13.07.2011 (Annexure P/5). CWP No. 14312 of 2011 -2- .. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I find no illegality or perversity in the order of the learned Commissioner. After learned Commissioner and Financial Commissioner were satisfied that munadi was not done in accordance with law, fresh munadi was ordered, therefore, the petitioner cannot be said to be prejudiced as he is still at liberty to move application for the post of Lambardar. In the given facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to exercise my writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Petition is dismissed in limine. (ALOK SINGH) 08.08.2011 JUDGE som