K.S.JANJUA,J - (1.) ON the death of Harcharan Singh Lambardar of village Pandori Nijjran, the process for appointment of new Lambardar was started. Proclamation was made and applications were invited. Harjanak Singh (petitioner) and Jagdev Singh (respondent) applied for the post. Naib Tehsildar recommended Harjanak Singh while Tehsildar and SDM recommended Jagdev Singh. District Collector Jalandhar appointed Harjanak Singh as Lambardar but this decision was upset by Commissioner Jalandhar Division who ruled in favour of Jagdev Singh. Hence the present appeal/petition.
(2.) BOTH candidates are eligible to be appointed as Lambardar and District Collector's choice should not generally be interfered with unless it is illegal or perverse, but in this case I am inclined to uphold the order of Commissioner Jalandhar Division in favour of Jagdev Singh because of the reasons given in succeeding paragraphs. Admittedly, the Lambardari belongs to 'Gabli Patti' and Harjanak Singh has no land in that Patti. Jagdev Singh fulfils the qualifications and has 55 kanals of land in Gabli Patti. The point which requires reconciliation here is whether a candidate who does not have land in the Patti to which Lambardari belongs, can be appointed as Lambardar for that Patti. Admittedly, there is no bar on such appointment. But such an appointment immediately attracts action under Rule 16(i)(c) of Land Revenue Rules, which renders such appointments invalid. Rule 16(i)(c) reads as follows :- "16(i)(c) - in any other estate he ceases to be a land-owner in the estate or sub-division of the estate in respect which he holds office."
(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner has drawn my pointed attention to 1998-PLJ-428 (an ex-serviceman has to be given preference) an 1997(2) PLJ-361 (owning of land in Patti is not necessary - candidate must have land in the estate). My attention was also drawn in 1997-PLJ-361 according to which Sh. S.R. Bunger, Financial Commissioner has ruled as under :- "(a) Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 - Lambardar, appointment of - Owning of landed property in the particular Patti in that Revenue Estate - Not necessary - Rule 16(i)(c) does not prescribe that a candidate must own landed property in the Patti - All vacancies of Lambardars - Filled up for the Estate and not for a particular Patti - All residents of the village eligible to apply for the post of Lambardar - Extent of property owned in the Estate as a whole to be taken into consideration - Ownership of land in a particular Patti - Not the pre-condition for such appointment - Wrong to say that candidate to be appointed as Lambardar must own landed property in the specific Patti for which he is to be appointed - Not the requirement of law either under the Act or the Rules, that a candidate must own landed property in the specific Patti - Requirement of ownership of property in the Estate - Insistence on ownership of property in the Patti, Taraf, Panna or Sub-Division of an Estate - Not justified." ;