IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH L.P.A. No. 192 of 2009 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: March 25, 2009 Preetinder Singh …Appellant Versus Financial Commissioner Appeal-I, Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. BHALLA Present: Mr. Mukand Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Tribhawan Singla, Advocate, for the Caveator-respondent No. 4. 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? M.M. KUMAR, J. This appeal is directed against judgment dated 14.1.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 7255 of 2006, allowing the writ petition filed by Shri Harsharan Singh, Caveator-respondent No. 4. Learned Single Judge has taken into account the primary issue that the recommendation has been made by the District Collector, Mukatsar- respondent No. 3 in favour of respondent No. 4 and according to Rule 15 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules, 1889 the considerations are that person who is appointed to the office of Lambardar has to be preferred who has hereditary claim, the property in the estate to secure the recovery of the L.P.A. No. 192 of 2009 land revenue and all other consideration. Respondent No. 4 has been found to be answering the aforesaid criterion by recording the finding that the grand father of respondent No. 4 has remained Lambardar and even his uncle was working as Lambardar of the village. He has able body being 40 years of age and has 30 acres of land. Therefore, we do not find any legal infirmity in the view taken by the learned Single Judge, especially when the order the District Collector has to be given due consideration, which was revered by the Financial Commissioner without lawful reasons. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (H.S. BHALLA) March 25, 2009 JUDGE Pkapoor 2