Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2022) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 16769 = 2022(1) L.A.R. 441
Decided on: 25.05.2022
Present:
Mr. Virender Singh Punia, Advocate for the petitioner
Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13 – Haryana Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – One candidate for post – Fresh munadi – Legality of -- Total three candidates had applied but two had withdrawn their candidature and, accordingly, the matter was remanded for a fresh munadi so that more candidates could apply and a meritorious candidate could be selected -- Appellate and revisional authorities refused to interfere as there is no perversity -- Writ petition has no merit, dismissed.
(Para 1-4)
***
SUDHIR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) –
1. The petitioner was a candidate for the post of Lambardar. He is aggrieved because the Collector remanded the case for a fresh munadi. Appeal and revision filed by him have failed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Collector was in error in remanding the case for a fresh munadi. The munadi had infact been done and the Assistant Collector had reported that the same was done in accordance with the rules. Thus, the order remanding the case was illegal and deserved to be set aside.
3. The argument cannot be accepted because a perusal of the order of the Collector shows that order of remand was passed as only one candidate remained. Total three candidates had applied but two had withdrawn their candidature and, accordingly, the matter was remanded for a fresh munadi so that more candidates could apply and a meritorious candidate could be selected. The appellate and revisional authorities have refused to interfere with this order because there is no perversity therein.
4. The writ petition has no merit and is dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
********