***

HARSH BUNGER J. (ORAL) –

1. Prayer in the instant civil writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India, inter alia, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for setting aside the order dated 26.08.2025 (Annexure P-5), passed by learned Financial Commissioner, Haryana (in short 'Financial Commissioner') and also order dated 17.10.2014 (Annexure P-1), passed by learned District Collector, Kaithal (in short 'Collector').

2. Briefly, on demise of Shri Khem Chand, previous Lambardar of village Pidal, Tehsil Gulha, District Kaithal, proceedings were initiated for filling up the aforesaid vacancy, wherein petitioner-Gian Singh (in short 'petitioner') and respondent No. 5-Vir Bhan (in short 'respondent No. 5') were also the candidates.

2.1 The Tehsildar, Gulha as well as Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Gulha recommended the candidature of respondent No. 5 for the aforesaid vacancy and placed the matter before learned Collector.

2.2 Learned Collector, after considering the relative merits and demerits of candidates, found respondent No. 5 as a suitable candidate and accordingly, appointed him as Lambardar of village Pidal, vide order dated 17.10.2014 (Annexure P-1).

2.2 Feeling aggrieved against learned Collector's order dated 17.10.2014 (Annexure P-1), petitioner filed an appeal before learned Commissioner, Karnal Division, Karnal (in short 'Divisional Commissioner'), which came to be allowed, vide order dated 29.05.2018 (Annexure P-3), whereby learned Collector's order was set aside and the matter was remanded to learned Collector for deciding the matter again.

2.3 Feeling aggrieved, respondent No. 5 preferred a revision petition (ROA No. 09 of 2018-19) before learned Financial Commissioner, which has been allowed, vide order dated 26.08.2025 (Annexure P-5), whereby learned Divisional Commissioner's order has been set aside and learned Collector's order, appointing respondent No. 5 as Lambardar of village Pidal, has been maintained.

3. In the aforementioned circumstances, petitioner has filed the instant civil writ petition before this Court for seeking relief(s), as noticed hereinabove

4. Heard.

5. Learned counsel for petitioner has raised only one argument that the petitioner is more educated (being B.A. LL.B) than respondent No. 5 (who is only 10+2 pass).

5.1 I have considered the aforesaid submission raised by learned counsel for petitioner; however, I find no merit in the same. Rule 15 of Haryana Land Revenue Rules prescribes the considerations to be kept in view, while appointing a Lambardar. Rule 15 of Haryana Land Revenue Rules reads as under :-

"15. Matters to be considered in first appointments. - In all first appointments of headman, regard shall be had among other matters to –

(a)      his experience as substitute/sarbarah lambardar;

(b)      extent of property in the estate possessed by the candidate.

(c)      services rendered to the State by himself or by his family;

(d)      his personal influence, character, ability and freedom from indebtedness;

(e)      the strength and importance of the community from which selection of a headman is to be made;

(f) services rendered by himself or by his family in the national movements to secure freedom of India;

[In case of an ex-headman of an estate or Sub-division thereof in the territory now comprising the State of [Haryana] who had resigned or was dismissed on account of his participation in a national movement before partition and another headman was appointed in his place, the present incumbent of the post shall be removed irrespective of the provisions of rule 16 and the ex-headman would be appointed in his place if he has not rendered himself unfit for appointment for any of the reasons given in rule 16 except imprisonment for a political offence before 15th August, 1947. In case the ex-headman is no longer alive, a person of his family who would under the rules have been entitled to be headmen if the resignation or dismissal had not intervened, would be appointed as headman. But when no such person exist there would be no need to remove the existing Lambardar.]

(g) services rendered by himself to the community and development programmes;

(h) he shall be not less than 21 years of age at the time of inviting the application for the appointment of Lambardar;

(i) he should be literate, preferably middle pass.”

5.2 A perusal of above extracted provision contained in Rule 15 of Haryana Land Revenue Rules would show that as far as educational qualification is concerned, a candidate for the post of Lambardar has to be middle pass and in this case, respondent No. 5 has studied upto 12th class and on that account, he cannot be said to be ineligible for appointment to the post of Lambardar.

5.3 No doubt, petitioner has studied upto B.A. LL.B.; however, it is also not disputed before this Court that the petitioner is a practising advocate and he may not be available in the village at all times to attend the duties of Lambardar.

6. I have gone through the order passed by learned Collector and a perusal of same would reveal that respondent No. 5 was appointed as a Lambardar while taking into consideration that he is 43 years of age; has studied upto 12th class and he owns 70 Kanal 10 Marla of land. It has also come on record that his name was recommended by Tehsildar, Gulha as well as Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Gulha for appointment to the aforesaid vacancy.

6.1 It is well settled that in the matter of appointment of a Lambardar, the choice of learned Collector cannot be lightly interfered with, even if two views are possible, unless there is any patent illegality of perversity therein.

7. Learned counsel for petitioner has failed to point out any such patent illegality or perversity in the order dated 17.10.2014 (Annexure P-1), passed by learned Collector, appointing respondent No. 5 as Lambardar of village Pidal, Tehsil Gulha, District Kaithal.

8. Considering the totality of circumstances, I find no merit in this writ petition and same is accordingly, dismissed.

9. Pending application (s), if any, shall also stand closed.

Petition dismissed.

********