- (1.) Jagtar Singh has been appointed as Lambardar of Village Shahpur, Tehsil Payal, District Ludhiana. His appointment is contested by three different applicants, who had contested the claim for appointment to the post of Lambardar of this Village. The appointment of Jagtar Singh, however, has been upheld by the Commissioner and accordingly three petitioners, namely, Malkit Singh , Jaswant Singh and Harimail Singh have filed three separate Civil Writ Petitions Bearing Nos.15210 of 2011 (Malkit Singh Vs. Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala and others), 16178 of 2011 (Jaswant Singh Vs. Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala and others) and 21799 of 2011 (Harimail Singh Vs. Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala and others) to challenge the order appointing Jagtar Singh as Lambardar. Since common order is under challenge in these writ petitions, these writ petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of through this common order. The facts have been taken from the lead petition No.15210 of 2011 (Malkit Singh Vs. Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala and others).
(2.) The post of Lambardar of Village Shahpur fell vacant on the death of previous Lambardar on 5.2.2007. A proclamation was made in the village, inviting applications for appointment to the post of Lambardar on 7.11.2007. In all, 9 candidates submitted their applications, which include the three petitioners, Harimail Singh, Jaswant Singh and Malkit Singh, besides Surinder Singh and respondent, Jagtar Singh, who has been appointed as Lambardar. Naib Tehsildar, Payal, forwarded his recommendation, recommending the name of respondent, Jagtar Singh. It is alleged that said Jagtar Singh was not owning any land and was also in an unauthorized possession of the Gram Panchayat land but still, his name was recommended by the Naib Tehsildar. Petitioner, Malkit Singh, was described as non-political person. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Payal, sent the recommendation to the Collector, who appointed respondent, Jagtar Singh, as Lambardar on 19.3.2010. The petitioner would allege that the Collector did so by ignoring the merits of the respective petitioners and appointed respondent, Jagtar Singh, without any application of mind. The petitioners, accordingly appealed against the order passed by the Collector, which were dismissed by the Commissioner on 17.5.2011. The Commissioner has observed that respondent, Jagtar Singh, is sufficiently educated and owns sufficient land. This reasoning is disputed by the petitioners in these three petitions and it is urged that respondent, Jagtar Singh, is not owning any land, which is evident from the report given by Halqa Patwari. Accordingly, the petitioners have impugned this order through the present writ petitions.
(3.) During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners had raised some additional arguments, which are also contained in the connected petitions. It is alleged that there are two FIRs registered respondent No.3, Jagtar Singh, which were completely ignored while directing his appointment as Lambardar. In addition, it is also alleged that respondent, Jagtar Singh, does not own any land, but still he has been appointed as Lambardar. The petitioners claim that they are otherwise better qualified and their merits were ignored. Not only that, even the fact that respondent, Jagtar Singh, was occupying Gram Panchayat land unauthorizedly has been ignored while appointing him as Lambardar.;