L.P.A. No. 1931 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH L.P.A. No. 1931 of 2011 Date of Decision:- 19.10.2011 Ram Chander .....Appellant Versus State of Haryana and another .....Respondents CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH Present:- Mr. Ankur Malik, Advocate for Mr. Y.P. Malik, Advocate for the appellant. **** SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J(Oral). Appellant Ram Chander who was earlier working on the post of Lambardar (Backward Class) has filed the instant LPA against the judgment dated 26.7.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the orders dated 23.10.2007 (Annexure P-1 ) and 19.6.2009 (Annexure P-9) passed by the Collector, Bhiwani and the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, respectively have been set aside and the matter regarding appointment of Lambardar has been remitted to the authorities below, with a direction to call for fresh applications by making fresh Munadi in the village. It is pertinent to mention here that another candidate namely Raghbir Singh has also filed LPA No. 1907 of 2011 titled Raghbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana and another against the aforesaid order and the said LPA was dismissed by this Court on 13.10.2011 while making the following orders:- “In the year 2008, the Rules for appointment of Lambardar were amended and it was provided that a L.P.A. No. 1931 of 2011 -2- candidate for the post of Lambardar should be 8th standard pass. While remanding the matter and ordering inviting of fresh applications, the learned Single Judge has considered this fact. It is true that when the process of appointment of Lambardar was started in this case, there was no condition that a candidate for the post of Lambardar should be 8th standard pass. But when the suitable candidates are not available, then in our opinion, the learned Singled Judge has rightly set aside the orders of the Collector as well as the Financial Commissioner and directed the authorities to make appointment to the post of Lambardar by calling for fresh applications by making fresh Mundai. In these days of high technology, where even the revenue record has been computerised, a Lambardar at least should have basic educational qualification, so that he may be able to perform his duty more effectively. Secondly, it has been found by the learned Single Judge that on the day of inviting the applications for the post of Lambardar, the appellant was defaulter of the Electricity department. He has filed a wrong undertaking that he was paying the instalments of the electricity bill regularly as per the schedule. But it has been found that the appellant has paid the amount, when the appeal was pending before the Commissioner. Therefore, it has been held that at the time of consideration of the candidature of the appellant for the post of Lambardar by the Collector, he was defaulter and his candidature ought to have been rejected by the Collector on the said ground, but it was wrongly accepted by the Collector as well as the Financial Commissioner. Thus, in our opinion, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned Single Judge does not require any interference in the appeal. No merits. L.P.A. No. 1931 of 2011 -3- Dismissed.” Since the impugned order has already been upheld in the said LPA, we do not find any ground to take a different view in this appeal. Dismissed. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE 19.10.2011 ( PARAMJEET SINGH ) reema JUDGE