Ajai Lamba, J. - (1.) LAMBARDAR was to be appointed for Village Bhilpura, Tehsil Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar. Collector, Yamuna Nagar appointed Sushil Kumar son of Samey Singh -Respondent No. 4 while considering the comparative merit of the candidates. While the Petitioner is 10+2 pass, the Respondent Sushil Kumar is 9th Class pass. The Collector has returned a positive finding that on the date of application, the Petitioner did not own any land in the village. Private Respondent, to the contrary, owned 4 acres of land. There is a contribution towards Small Savings Scheme by the Petitioner, to the extent of Rs.10 lakhs. The Respondent made a deposit of Rs.15,000/ -. The Panchayat resolution is in favour of Sushil Kumar -Respondent No. 4. The SDO (Civil) and Tehsildar recommended the same name of Sushil Kumar to be appointed as Lambardar.
(2.) THE Collector has taken into account a circumstance that Rajbir Singh Petitioner did not live in Village Bhilpura, rather he lived in Village Ismailpur, at the time when the process for appointing Lambardar was initiated. The Petitioner was registered voter in Village Ismailpur at Serial No. 109. The ration card and Chulha Tax paid in Village Bhilpura relates to the period after initiation of process of appointment of Lambardar. The facts have not been disputed before this Court and what has been contended is that the authorities are required to see the land holding of the Petitioner and residence of the Petitioner at the point in time when appointment is made. I have considered the contentions of the learned Counsel.
(3.) COLLECTOR is the revenue authority, who is required to take work from Lambardar. Respondent No. 4 Sushil Kumar is the choice of the Collector in context of comparative merit of the two candidates. No disability can be traced in the claim of the private Respondent. In such circumstances, in my considered opinion, the Appellate Authority was not required to interfere with the choice of the Lambardar. In this context, order Annexure P -2 is rendered illegal. The Financial Commissioner for the right reasons has set aside the order Annexure P -2.;