CWP No. 18563 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 18563 of 2009 Date of Decision: 4.12.2009 Gurcharan Singh ....Petitioner. Versus Financial Commissioner (Appeals-I), Punjab and others ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Puja Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. By way of instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 27.12.2007 (Annexure P-2) passed by respondent No.3, dated 4.11.2008 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No.2 and dated 18.8.2009 (Annexure P-4) passed by respondent No.1 whereby respondent No.4-Balwant Singh was appointed as Lamberdar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was a better candidate than respondent No.4 and moreover the criminal case on which the Collector had relied upon to decline the petitioner's claim to be appointed as Lambardar, the petitioner had been acquitted by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur, vide order dated 14.7.2009 (Annexure P-7). I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. CWP No. 18563 of 2009 -2- The Financial Commissioner while upholding the choice of the Collector and the Commissioner, in para 3 of the order had recorded as under:- “3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and I find that the Collector had appointed respondent Balwant Singh as Lamberdar after passing a detailed order. The Collector had concluded that candidates Gurcharan Singh, Rajesh Kumar and Maninder Singh were involved in criminal cases. In addition, the respondent also had more land (138 kanals 6 marlas) compared to the petitioner, who owns 111 kanals of land. The petitioner is 8th pass whereas the respondent is 7th pass. The Commissioner had upheld the choice of the Collector. The plea of learned counsel for the petitioner that he had been exonerated of the criminal cases does not affect the choice of the Collector as the respondent had relatively clean record compared to the petitioner. It is an accepted practice in lambardari cases that generally speaking the choice of the Collector has to be respected unless and until there was something patently wrong with the order. Under these circumstances, I see no justification for entertaining the revision petition and dismiss the same in limine.” The Collector, the Commissioner and the Financial CWP No. 18563 of 2009 -3- Commissioner after considering the respective merits of the candidates had concluded that Balwant Singh is better candidate and had appointed him as Lambardar of village Mohre Wala Dakhli Dhira Patra, Tehsil and District Ferozepur. This Court in ordinary circumstances would not interfere in the orders passed by the authorities below unless the same are shown to be illegal or perverse in any manner. In view of the above, this Court is satisfied that there is no illegality or perversity in the orders impugned herein which may warrant interference in exercise of its powers under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed. December 4, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE