***

Lambardar -- Appointment upheld as proclamation was duly conducted and petitioner failed to apply in time; Collector’s choice found non-perverse -- Writ petition dismissed.

***

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 – Constitution of India, Articles 226/227 – Appointment of Lambardar – Mustri munadi/proclamation – Challenge to appointment – Record showing due proclamation in village including entry in rojnamcha and statements of Panchayat members – Petitioner failed to apply within prescribed time and thus has no locus standi – Financial Commissioner upheld Collector’s order after comparative assessment of candidates and found no perversity in Collector’s decision – Choice of Collector in Lambardar appointment not to be interfered with unless perverse – Writ jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 not to be exercised to re-appreciate merits – Writ petition dismissed.

(Paras 7 to 9)

Lambardar -- Appointment -- Collector found respondent more suitable candidate and appointed him as Lambardar -- Concurrent findings recorded by Collector, Commissioner and Financial Commissioner upheld -- No illegality or perversity found -- Writ petition dismissed.

***

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Sections 28, 29 -- Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rules 14 to 16 -- Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Appointment of Lambardar -- Scope of judicial review -- Choice of Collector in matter of appointment of Lambardar should not be lightly interfered with merely because another view is possible -- Interference warranted only in cases of patent illegality or perversity -- Concurrent findings of Collector, Commissioner and Financial Commissioner affirming appointment of respondent as Lambardar -- No illegality or perversity therein -- No ground made out for interference in writ jurisdiction.

(Paras 8 to 10)

Lambardar -- Appointment -- Sarbrah Lambardar -- Mere experience as Sarbrah Lambardar does not confer preferential right to appointment -- Choice of Collector upheld -- Writ dismissed.

***

Lambardar -- Appointment -- Sarbrah Lambardar -- Preference to a Sarbrah Lambardar can be granted only where comparative merits of candidates are nearly equal -- Candidate younger in age, possessing larger landholding and recommended by lower revenue authorities rightly preferred for appointment.

***

A. Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (17 of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Constitution of India, Articles 226/227 -- Appointment of Lambardar -- Challenge to orders of Collector, Commissioner and Financial Commissioner appointing respondent as Lambardar -- Petitioner contended that being a former Sarbrah Lambardar, he was entitled to preference in view of Government notification dated 25.12.2021 -- Held, preference on basis of service as Sarbrah Lambardar cannot override comparative merits of candidates and grant of such preference being akin to hereditary claim already held unconstitutional -- Appointed candidate found younger in age, possessing larger landholding and recommended by lower revenue authorities -- Collector after considering comparative merits appointed respondent as Lambardar -- Choice of Collector not liable to interference unless shown to be perverse or suffering from patent illegality -- No illegality or perversity found in concurrent orders passed by revenue authorities -- Writ petition dismissed.

(Para 6 to 10)

B. Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (17 of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar -- Sarbrah Lambardar -- Mere experience as Sarbrah Lambardar not decisive -- Preference on such basis can be granted only when comparative merits of candidates are substantially similar -- Appointed candidate found younger in age than petitioner, possessed larger landholding and was recommended by lower revenue authorities -- Appointment upheld.

(Para 7)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Age of candidate – Choice of Collector – Writ jurisdiction -- Respondent No.4 was appointed as the lambardar by the learned Collector -- Said appointment further affirmed by the learned Commissioner and Financial Commissioner -- Respondent No.4 is younger in age than the petitioner and has studied up to 10+2 along with an ITI diploma and he also owns 28 kanals of land in the Village and is an agriculturist – Held, in the matter of appointment of the lambardar age of a candidate is a relevant consideration and also the choice of the learned Collector is not to be lightly interfered with even if two views are possible unless there is patent illegality or perversity therein -- No illegality or perversity in the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities -- Writ petition fails and dismissed.

(Para 5-8)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Allegation of encroachment over Panchayat land -- Collector appointed petitioner as Lambardar -- Ld. Commissioner as well as the Financial Commissioner remanded the matter to the learned Collector for verifying the illegal encroachment over the Panchayat land by the petitioner – There is considerable basis for remanding the matter to the learned Collector for verifying the illegal encroachment over the Panchayat land by the petitioner especially considering the fact that certain ejectment orders were produced before the learned Financial Commissioner -- No merit in writ petition dismissed.

(Para 7)

Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13 --  Haryana Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Hereditary claim -- Petitioner was wrongly appointed as Lambardar (BC) on the ground of his hereditary claim by Collector – Divisional Commissioner rightly set aside the order  of Collector being ultra vires the Constitution -- Respondent No. 4 is more meritorious than the petitioner in terms of his age and educational qualification and his name was recommended by lower revenue officials – No illegality or perversity in the order passed by learned Divisional Commissioner in appointing respondent No. 4 as Lambardar.

(Para 7-9)

A. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar -- Acquittal in criminal case – Effect of -- Although the petitioner was acquitted in the criminal cases, however, once a person with clean image/ antecedents available, then no fault can be found in the choice of the Collector in appointing respondent No.4 as lambardar.

(Para 8)

B. Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector – Interference in – Permissibility of -- In the matter of appointment of lambardar, the choice of the Collector is not to be lightly interfered with even if two views are possible unless there is patent illegality or perversity therein.

(Para 9)

A. Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector -- Collector has taken note of age, education, landholding etc. of the respective candidates and also taken into account the recommendation by lower revenue officers etc. -- Respondent No. 4 was a novice of about 20 years of age whereas the petitioner was found to be a mature and intelligent person, Collector found petitioner as a suitable candidate -- It is a well settled law that in the matter of appointment of Lambardar, the choice of Collector is not to be lightly interfered with even if two views are possible – Order of Financial Commissioner set aside and the order passed by learned Collector, appointing the petitioner as Lambardar maintained.

(Para 6, 7)

B. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Recommendation of revenue officer -- Collector is not bound by the recommendation made by the revenue authorities in favour of a candidate; however, due consideration is to be accorded to such recommendations as they are in a position to assess the suitability of a candidate and such recommendation would have some persuasive value.

(Para 6.5)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 21, 22 -- Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Fresh proclamation – Challenge to -- Petitioner is about 80 years of age, proceedings for filling up the vacant post of Lambardar of Village were initiated more than 10 years ago and the same have not been finalized till date -- Only two applicants for the post -- Authorities have concurrently held that no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner, if a fresh munadi is ordered to be conducted as the same shall widen the choice of better selection for the post of Lambardar – Neither the copy of the proclamation notice placed on record nor the name of the place where the said notice was pasted forthcoming -- It cannot be concluded that the proclamation was validly conducted – Writ dismissed.

(Para 4, 5)

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), Section 6A, 11(6) – Appointment of Arbitrator – Assignment of agreement – Effect of -- Existence of arbitration agreement in the license agreement and share subscription agreement is not in dispute – Court has to confine itself to the examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement, it would not be appropriate for Court to delve deep into the issue --  Matter referred to the Delhi International Arbitration Centre for appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate upon the dispute between the parties.

(Para 5, 11, 12)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 (d) -- Appointment of Lambardar – Interaction quality of candidate – Consideration of -- Appellant was quizzed by the Collector, District Collector found that appellant was incapable of telling anything about himself, it was found that he was not a suitable candidate for the post of Lambardar – Respondent no. 4 was appointed as he appeared to be more mature and healthy person -- The interaction part, which is most important aspect to find out the capability as such, was totally lost sight of by the Financial Commissioner while interfering in the well-considered order of the Collector – Ld. Single Judge has allowed the writ petition filed by respondent No.4 and set-aside the order passed by the Financial Commissioner – No merit in appeal, dismissed.

(Para 1, 4-6)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector -- Land-holding – Requirement of -- Ld. Collector recorded in his order that the petitioner has land in another village, which is enough for the land revenue security purpose – Ld. Collector is the main authority for appointment of the Lambardar -- It is the Collector, who not only appreciates the antecedents of all the candidates in the fray but also personally interacts with them – Ld. Financial Commissioner has erred in upsetting the choice of the Collector – As land revenue stood abolished in both the State of Punjab and Haryana, long back, thus owning land by the candidates for the post of Lambardar would not be of much significance any further – Petitioner’s appointment was set aside only on the ground that he did not own any land in the revenue estate – Financial Commissioner order set aside.

(Para 7-11)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Younger in age – Non-consideration of other factors – Effect of -- Petitioner was appointed as Lambardar by Collector, only on the ground that she is younger than the other candidates; whereas, the other factors, as envisaged under Rule 15 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules, have not been taken into consideration – Commissioner remanded back the case, which order was upheld by the Financial Commissioner --  Case requires a fresh look at the level of District Collector is correct and does not call for any interference.

(Para 8.1-9)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15(c) – Appointment of Lambardar -- Service to nation – Availability in village -- Respondent No.4/ appointed candidate earlier had worked for 16 years as Lambardar and was a retired officer from CRPF and sufficiently educated upto 10th standard and had served the nation and he had taken part in various wars/operations and also a holder of prestigious President Medal -- Service rendered to the State is an important aspect -- Appellant is working in the Forest Department and, therefore, cannot give as much time to the villagers – Appointment of respondent no. 4, upheld.

(Para 4, 5)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15(d) – Appointment of Lambardar – Encroachment upon common land – Ld. Collector should have given finding whether possession was unauthorised or not -- Clean image of the candidate and the character of the candidate has to be seen and kept in mind by the Collector -- In such circumstances, the Financial Commissioner had remanded the matter for fresh consideration for which no fault can be found – Order of Financial Commissioner, upheld.

(Para 8, 9)

Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 15, 16 -- Haryana Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Less educated candidate – Less land holding – Effect of – Choice of Collector :

-- Respondent no. 4 recommended by Assistant Collector Ist Grade and Assistant Collector IInd Grade. Although, the Collector is not bound by the recommendation made by the Revenue Authorities in favour of a candidate; however, due consideration is to be accorded to such recommendations as they are in a position to assess the suitability of a candidate and such recommendation would have some persuasive value.

-- Respondent No. 4 has about 7 acres of land, which is sufficient to be taken into consideration for the purpose of security of revenue, collected by the Lambardar -- Moreover, land revenue stood abolished in both the State of Punjab and Haryana, long back, thus owning land by the candidates for the post of Lambardar would not be of much significance any further.

-- Respondent no. 4 acquitted in criminal case under Section 170 and 420 IPC.

Learned Collector is the main authority for appointment of the Lambardar -- It is the Collector, who not only appreciates the antecedents of all the candidates in the fray but also personally interacts with them -- Merely because the petitioner is more educated or holds slightly more land than respondent No. 4, it cannot be said that the choice made by learned Collector, keeping in view all the relevant considerations, is illegal or perverse – Writ petition dismissed.

(Para 7-9)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 16 -- Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Less land holding – 10^th pass in comparison to BA -- Choice of Collector – Interference in – Petitioner is 10^th Pass having 6 acres of land  -- Respondent no. 4 is BA Pass having 15 acres of land -- Petitioner is younger in age than respondent No. 4 and is sufficiently educated and has sufficient landholding -- Further, the name of the petitioner was recommended by the lower revenue officers and the learned Collector found the petitioner as the most suitable candidate for appointment to the post of Lambardar -- Financial Commissioner/ FC remanded the case by noticing the claim of respondent No. 4 that he is more educated and he holds more land than the petitioner whereas the other relevant aspects have not been taken into consideration -- Choice of Collector is not to be lightly interfered with, even if two views are possible – Order of FC set aside, order passed by ld. Collector, appointing the petitioner as Lambardar upheld.

(Para 7.1, 7.3, 9)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar -- Petitioner is younger in age; is more educated than respondent No.4 and her name was recommended by the SDM – Ld Collector’s appointed petitioner as Lambardar and order was further upheld by the learned Divisional Commissioner, however the Financial Commissioner set aside both orders and appointed respondent no.4 as Lambardar.

-- In the State of Punjab, age of a candidate is a relevant factor.

-- Respondent No. 4 owns more land however the petitioner has about 5 Kanals of land, which is sufficient to be taken into consideration for the purpose of security of revenue, collected by the Lambardar.

-- Petitioner is a well-educated lady having done M.A. B.Ed. and also holds an I.T. diploma.

Order passed by learned Financial Commissioner is unsustainable and the same is accordingly set aside.

(Para 7-10)

A. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Appointment of Lambardar – Less land holding – Effect of -- Petitioner owns more land than appointed candidate/ respondent No. 4 -- Respondent No. 4 has 10 Kanals 16 Marlas of land, which is sufficient to be taken into consideration for the purpose of security of revenue, collected by the Lambardar -- No scope for any interference.

(Para 1, 8.2, 9)

B. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15, 20 – Punjab Land Administration Manual, Para 307 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Illiterate Candidate – Educated candidate – Preference of -- "Lambardari Rules" do not prescribe any minimum educational qualification for appointment of a Lambardar -- However, considering the duties to be performed by the Lambardar, as envisaged under Rule 20 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules; it would be in the fitness of things to prefer an educated person.

(Para 8.6-8.8)

C. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Appointment of Lambardar –Panch/ Sarpanch – Candidature of -- Being a Sarpanch or Member Panchayat reflects upon the popularity of a particular candidate in the village and is considered as a merit and not as a de-merit.

(Para 8.9)

D. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Appointment of Lambardar – Acquittal in criminal case -- Petitioner had criminal case, although he has been acquitted -- If a person with clean antecedents has been preferred, no fault can be found with the same.

(Para 8.10)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar -- Appointed candidate/ respondent No. 4 is younger in age and more educated than the petitioner. Moreover, the name of respondent No. 4 was recommended by Tehsildar, Moga and Sub Divisional Magistrate, Moga.

-- With regard to the appointment of a Lambardar in the State of Punjab, age of a candidate is a relevant factor.

-- as far as recommendations by the lower Revenue Officer is concerned, although, the Collector is not bound by the recommendation made by the Revenue Authorities in favour of a candidate; however, due consideration is to be accorded to such recommendations.

-- As far as holding of land is concerned, same is taken into consideration only for the purpose of security towards government revenue collected by the Lambardar. Respondent No. 4 has about 8 kanal of land, which is sufficient to be taken into consideration for the purpose of security of revenue, collected by the Lambardar. Moreover, land revenue stood abolished in both the State of Punjab and Haryana, long back, thus owning land by the candidates for the post of Lambardar would not be of much significance any further.

Ld. Financial Commissioner has rightly appointed respondent No. 4 as Lambardar, there is no scope for any interference in the impugned order.

(Para 9-12)

Haryana Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Acquittal in criminal case – Appellant/ ex-serviceman acquitted in criminal case -- Private respondent, who was aged 32 years and passed BA-II was having 5 acres of agricultural land found more suitable -- It is settled principle of law that though a person might have been acquitted but he is supposed to have clean antecedents should be no taint – Appeal dismissed.

(Para 4-6)

A. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Recommendation by Revenue authorities – Land ownership – Consideration of -- Not much difference in the age of petitioner (24 years) and respondent No.4 (30 years) and both are equally educated -- Respondent No.4 (appointed by Collector) owns land in his own name and his name was recommended by Tehsildar as well as Sub Divisional Magistrate – Although, the recommendation made by the lower Revenue Authorities may not be binding on the District Collector, however, due consideration is to be accorded to such recommendation as they are in a position to assess the suitability of a candidate and such recommendation would have some persuasive value – Order of Collector restored.

(Para 10-14)

B. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector -- Learned Collector is the main authority for appointment of the lambardar -- It is the Collector, who not only appreciates the antecedents of all the candidates in the fray but also personally interacts with them -- Thus, the subjective satisfaction of the Collector, should have been respected.

(Para 12)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Age of candidate -- Respondent No.4 (24 years old) had an edge over the petitioner (39 years old) inasmuch as that he is younger in age than the petitioner -- Age of a candidate is a relevant factor.

(Para 3, 3.1, 12)

A. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 17(ii) -- Appointment of Lambardar – Hereditary claim -- Contended that the petitioner being son of the deceased Lambardar has hereditary claim to the post – Hereditary claim is unconstitutional, argument raised is without any force, rejected.

(Para 5, 6)

B. Punjab Land Revenue Act 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector -- Appointment of the Lambardar is prerogative of the Collector and even if there are two views possible, then the view taken by the Collector should not be discarded -- Collector is the prime authority for deciding the most suitable candidate for the post of Lambardar and his order cannot be interfered unless the same suffers from material perversity.

(Para 6, 7)

A. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Age of candidate -- For the appointment of Lambardar, age of the candidate is a relevant factor.

(Para 7)

B. Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector -- Collector is the main authority for appointment of the Lambardar -- It is the Collector, who not only appreciates the antecedents of all the candidates in the fray, but also personally interacts with them -- Subjective satisfaction of the Collector cannot be ignored in a cavalier manner.

(Para 7)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector – Recommendation by revenue officer – Binding or not -- On evaluation of the inter se merits of all the candidates, the Collector found respondent No.4 to be the most meritorious and suitable candidate and thus, appointed him as Lambardar of the Village -- Report of the Assistant Collector 1st & 2nd Grade and the Sub Divisional Magistrate in which name of the petitioner was recommended to the Collector for appointment are to be taken into consideration but the same do not confer any right on the concerned candidate to be appointed as Lambardar of the Village -- Respondent No.4 was younger in age than the petitioner – No perversity in the orders passed by the Collector, Appellate and Revisional Authorities – Writ petition dismissed.

(Para 4-7)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Qualification/ Intelligence – Choice of Collector -- On the evaluation of inter se merits of all the candidates, respondent No.4 was found to be more meritorious and was appointed as lambardar of the village, which was upheld by the Appellate and Revisional Authority as well -- Qualification wise though respondent No.4 was found to be less educated than the petitioner, however he was found to be more matured and intelligent by the Collector -- Choice of the Collector cannot be interfered unless the same suffers from any perversity – No perversity in the impugned orders passed – Writ petition dismissed.

(Para 8, 9)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 22 Rules 3 & 4 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Legal representative -- Once the appointed Lambardar has died, it is obvious that de novo process for the appointment of the Lambardar needs to be initiated by making fresh munadi --  In view of the provisions of Order 22 Rules 3 & 4 CPC, the applicants in the application do not have any surviving right to sue in place of the petitioner -- Application filed for impleadment of the LRs is not maintainable.

(Para 8-13)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector – Age of candidate -- On comparison of the inter se merits of all the candidates in the fray, ld. Collector found the petitioner to be more meritorious and thus, appointed him as Lambardar of the Village -- Petitioner was 12 years younger in age than respondent No.5 – If the inter se merits of the candidates are otherwise at par then the candidate younger in age should be preferred -- Choice of the Collector cannot be interfered in a cavalier manner -- Appointment upheld by the Commissioner, however, the Financial Commissioner set aside the order without disclosing any perversity in the order passed by the Collector – Order passed by Financial Commissioner set aside.

(Para 6-9)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar -- Collector, Commissioner and Financial Commissioner had appointed different candidates as Lambardar of village -- Settled law is that the Collector is the prime authority for appointing a Lambardar – A learned Single Judge considered the entire matter and remanded the same to the Collector for a fresh decision as to who should be appointed as Lambardar of village -- No error, factual or legal, in the impugned judgment warranting any interference.

(Para 3, 4)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Age – Qualification – Choice of Collector -- Petitioner though is younger in age and more qualified than respondent No.4 but respondent No.4 has served in the Army -- Respondent No.4 is 60 years of age and 8th pass -- No minimum qualification required for appointment of Lambardar -- As per Mandate of Rule 15, respondent No.4 has been found to be the most suitable candidate for the post -- All the authorities have given a concurrent finding – Choice of the Collector should not be disturbed in a cavalier manner -- No merit in the petition, dismissed.

(Para 5)

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- Bail – Life and liberty -- Bail is the Rule and Jail is an Exception – This principle finds its roots in one of the most distinguished fundamental rights, as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India -- Though the underlying objective behind detention of a person is to ensure easy availability of an accused for trial, without any inconvenience, however, in case the presence of an accused can be secured otherwise, then detention is not compulsory.

(Para 5)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- Constitution of India, Article 21 -- Bail – Speedy trial -- Life and liberty -- Right to a speedy trial is one of the rights of a detained person -- However, while deciding application for regular bail, the Courts shall also take into consideration the fundamental precept of criminal jurisprudence, which is “the presumption of innocence”, besides the gravity of offence(s) involved.

(Para 6)

C. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- Regular bail -- Petitioner is involved in two other criminal cases, however, petitioner has been granted the concession of bail in one case, the other FIR is under RP (UP) Act -- Co-accused, from whom mobile has been recovered, has been enlarged on bail by the learned trial Court -- Trial is at its initial stage and is not likely to conclude anytime soon, as out of total 14 prosecution witnesses, none has yet been examined -- Therefore, keeping the petitioner behinds the bars, who has undergone incarceration of 6 months 6 day would serve no purpose – Bail allowed.

(Para 10)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 19-B -- Appointment of SC Lambardar -- Christian candidate – Eligibility of -- Respondent No.4 belongs to the Christian community, as per mandate of Rule 19-B, he was eligible -- Collector hold respondent No.4 ineligible -- Commissioner set aside the order and remanded the case for decision afresh -- Financial Commissioner upheld the order of remand – Held, order passed by the District Collector suffered from perversity, rightly set aside -- District Collector directed to decide expeditiously within a period of three months.

(Para 5-7)

A. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Appointing authority of -- Collector is the prime authority for the appointment of Lambardar and he is in a better situation to assess the candidature of all the candidates in fray taking into consideration their overall merits and demerits.

(Para 7)

B. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Age of candidate – Consideration of -- A candidate who is younger in age should be given the preference.

(Para 7)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector -- On the comparison of the inter-se merits, name of respondent No.5 was recommended by the SDM and the Naib Tehsildar and finally the Collector appointed him as a Lambardar  -- Appeal and revision of the petitioner challenging the appointment dismissed – Held, choice of the Collector should not be disturbed in a cavalier manner -- It is the Collector, who not only appreciates the record of the candidates but also personally interacts with them – No perversity in the conclusion drawn by the Collector and thereafter, affirmed by the appellate and revisional authorities  -- Writ petition dismissed.

(Para 7-10)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 16 -- Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – One candidate -- Fresh munadi -- Petitioner is the grandson of the deceased Lambardar -- There were only three applications received and the rest candidates did not remain in fray and thus, the petitioner was the only available candidate -- View taken by the learned Financial Commissioner in accepting the revision and remanding the case for appointment of Lambardar by making fresh Munadi is well reasoned order passed to meet the ends of justice by providing fair opportunity to all the interested candidates of the village.

(Para 5)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 – Appointment of Lambardar – FIR against appointed candidate – Non-consideration of – Effect of – Petitioner was younger in age and was more qualified – Nothing adverse found against the petitioner -- FIR u/s 325, 323, 148, 149 of IPC was found to have been registered against the respondent No.5 (appointed candidate) though was acquitted – FIR has not been dealt with by respondent-authorities while arriving at the final decision – Impugned orders suffer from perversity, set aside – Case remanded back to the Collector for deciding afresh.

(Para 6, 7)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 – Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Two candidates -- Fresh process -- One candidate was 33 years of age and was BA pass and had 2 acres land in the Village whereas the other was 41 years of age who had passed BA and MA Part-1 and had 01 acre of land in Kharar -- It was found by the Collector that due to the ongoing pandemic, the applications received were not sufficient keeping in view the total population of the area, fresh process was ordered – No perversity in the findings -- Collector directed to initiate the fresh procedure and conclude the same expeditiously.

(Para 3)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 – Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Nambardar – Age of candidate – Land holding – Consideration of -- Choice of the Collector should not be disturbed -- It is the Collector, who not only appreciate the record of the candidates but also personally interacts with the candidates – Appointed Nambardar is also younger in age – For the appointment of Nambardar, age of the candidate is a relevant factor -- Holding of land is one of the parameters for the examination of the merits of the candidates, however, the same cannot be the sole ground for the rejection of the candidate, if the Collector finds the candidate otherwise meritorious and more suitable – Appointment upheld.

(Para 7)

Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Haryana Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector – FIR against candidate – Consideration of -- Subjective satisfaction of the Collector in the appointment of Lambardar has to be given due weightage and should not be normally interfered -- If there appears to be some ignorance regarding appreciation of inter-se merits, then the Collector should be given another opportunity to re-appreciate the merits of the candidates -- Petitioner was appointed by Collector stated to be involved in criminal activities as he is facing prosecution in three FIRs – View taken by the Appellate Court in remanding the case to the Collector for decision afresh could have served the interest of justice, however, by directing the Collector to appoint respondent No.2 the Lambardar of the Village defeated the very purpose – Orders of Ld. Commissioner directing the Collector to appoint respondent No.2 as Lambardar of the village set aside.

(Para 5-7)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar -- Travelling abroad – Candidature of -- Though travelling abroad is not a disqualification for the appointment as Lambardar but the petitioner has remained abroad for a considerable time -- Collector appointed respondent no.4 as Lambardar -- Availability of the Lambardar in the village is always essential and hence the decision of the Collector was rational in the fitness of the circumstances.

(Para 4)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 – Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of lambardar – Age of candidate -- Inter-se merits were compared and the petitioner was virtually double of the age of respondent No.4 and the petitioner was less qualified, however, Collector appointed the petitioner as Lambardar of the village -- In the appeal, respondent No.4 being younger in age and more qualified, was found more suitable -- Commissioner and Financial Commissioner have rightly remanded the case to the Collector for decision afresh – Reappreciation of the case afresh would also meet the ends of justice.

(Para 5-7)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Constitution of India, Article 226, 227 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector -- Choice of the Collector cannot be interfered in a cavalier manner and the same has to be given weightage unless and until there are some serious discrepancies in the appointment made by the learned Collector.

(Para 7)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Illegal possession of Panchayat land – New ground at Appellate stage -- At the time of appointment it had not been brought to the notice of the Collector that respondent No. 4 was in illegal possession of the Panchayat land -- It is a settled principle of law that consideration has to be seen at the time of appointment -- At that point of time, on merits, respondent No. 4 was appointed by the District Collector – Divisional Commissioner set aside the order and appointed appellant as Lambardar inspite of his limited jurisdiction by giving preference for his personal opinion and not on account of the fact that there was an illegality in the order of the District Collector, which could be only the ground as such for interference -- Financial Commissioner, Revenue corrected the said error and hence, the ld. Single Judge has rightly upheld the order of the Financial Commissioner -- Appeal dismissed.

(Para 2, 8-12)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Application after cut-off date – Fresh munadi -- Issue of validity of candidature was also subject matter before the Collector in appeal -- However, no order was passed on the same and the case was decided on merits considering the qualifications of both the candidates -- Financial Commissioner set aside appointment and order for fresh munadi – Ld. Single Judge declined to interfere -- Order of the F.C and the ld. Single Judge do not suffer from any infirmity, appeal dismissed.

(Para 1, 5-8)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Single candidate  -- Fresh munadi -- Being the sole candidate, the petitioner’s name was recommended by the Assistant Collector, and Sub-Divisional Officer (C) -- However, the Collector ordered a fresh munadi as two additional applications were received after the cut-off date – Held, in such a situation, it would be the discretion of the Collector either to appoint him or to order a fresh munadi -- Collector has chosen the latter option and the said action cannot be said to be perverse.

(Para 1-3)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Acquittal in criminal case -- 5th respondent was the choice of the Collector -- Criminal case was registered against respondent no. 5 on the allegation of having interfered with the duties of a public servant -- Police could not substantiate the allegations in the investigation and, thus, filed an untraced report -- It cannot be said that a stigma was cast on the character of the 5th respondent -- Possibility of false implication cannot be ruled out especially during elections – Thus, the appellate Court was not justified in interfering with the order of the Collector -- Interference made has been corrected by the Financial Commissioner – Writ challenging appointment of respondent no. 5 as Lambardar dismissed.

(Para 4)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 16 -- Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Acquittal in criminal case -- Petitioner was appointed as Lambardar by the Collector -- Financial Commissioner set aside his appointment inter alia on the ground of being involved in a criminal case – Held, being involved in a case under the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956 creates a doubt about the character of the petitioner and the same should have been kept in view while deciding the case of the lambardari -- Writ petition dismissed.

(Para 1-4)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Acquittal in FIR case -- Collector refused  to appoint the petitioner as Lambardar by saying even though he had been acquitted, stigma remained on his character – Judgment of acquittal shows that there appeared to be a fight between two factions in the village resulting in the registration of FIR -- Petitioner was not named therein and was summoned as an accused at a later stage -- Prosecution could not identify the accused -- Thus, all of them were acquitted – Held, allegations in the criminal case did not reflect upon the character of the petitioner and to hold to the contrary is a perversity -- Writ petition allowed, impugned orders set aside, matter remanded to the Collector for reconsideration of the case of the petitioner.

(Para 1-5)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 15, 16 -- Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Appointing authority for Lambardar – Power of Appellate/ Revisional authority -- Powers for appointment of a Lambardar have been conferred upon the Collector alone and not on the Appellate Authority or the Revisional Authority -- Appellate Authority as well as the Revisional Authority has the jurisdiction and power to set aside such appointment of the Lambardar by the Collector, however, the competent authority for appointing a Lambardar is none other than the Collector -- Matter thus has to be remanded back to the Collector for fresh consideration of the candidature of the eligible applicants for the post of Lambardar, who were available at the time of consideration.

(Para 5)