- (1.) Present writ petition is directed against the order dated 7.6.1999 (Annexure P-15), passed by the Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Haryana-respondent No. 1, whereby he set aside the order dated 6.6.1997 (Annexure P-14) passed by Commissioner, Gurgaon Division, restoring the removal order of the petitioner from the post of Lambardar, passed by the District Collector on 15.2.1996 (Annexure P-13). Notice of motion was issued by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.5.2001, however, no stay was granted. Written statement was filed. Thereafter, writ petition was admitted for regular hearing by the Division Bench, vide order dated 28.11.2002. That is how, this Court is seized of the matter. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) In compliance of the order dated 24.5.2016 passed by this Court, original official record was made available, which has been perused by this Court with the able assistance of learned counsel for the parties. Perusal of the official record would show that petitioner was appointed as Additional Lambardar (Backward Class), by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Palwal, vide order dated 11.3.1988, which is available at reverse side of page 15 of the official file, made available to this Court. Thereafter, in compliance of the dated 11.3.1988, passed by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Palwal, certificate of Lambardari was prepared and sent to the office of District Collector, Faridabad, for his signatures. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that certificate of Lambardari seems to have been signed by somebody on behalf of the District Collector, Faridabad. However, from bare perusal of Hindi version of the certificate of Lambardari (Annexure P-5), it seems that somebody has just put initials, however, it cannot be made out, as to whether it was the District Collector who has signed it or somebody else has put his initials on behalf of the District Collector. Thus, from a careful perusal of the original record, it becomes crystal clear that petitioner was never appointed as Lambardar by the District Collector, who admittedly was the only appointing authority. It is also not in dispute that Assistant Collector 1st Grade, was not competent to appoint any candidate as Lambardar, including the petitioner. Once it has gone undisputed before this Court that petitioner was never appointed as Lambardar (Backward Class), by the competent authority, i.e. District Collector, his certificate of Lambardari would be of no consequence. It is so said, because this certificate was based on an order without jurisdiction. Having said that, this Court feels no hesitation to conclude that petitioner has worked for some time as Lambardar, if at all, without any authority of law. Besides the above basic defect which could not have been cured by passing one or more subsequent orders, there were two other allegations against the petitioner. One was that he attested refusal report against the Sarpanch on the notice issued in a case of ejectment against his own father, regarding illegal possession over the panchayat land. Second allegation was that, petitioner became a witness to an equitable mortgage of the panchayat land which was mortgaged without any authority of law, by one loanee namely Shish Ram, resident of the village of the petitioner.
(3.) During the course of enquiry conducted by the Naib Tehsildar (Palwal), it also came to the notice in the deposition of one Sh. Jagan Singh that the petitioner, in connivance with his father, got a decree of 14 acres of land of Gram Panchayat in his name illegally and also got the land mutated in his favour. Thereafter, he filed 14 cases against the Gram Panchayat through his father. Gram Panchayat met the Deputy Commissioner and got girdawaris as well as mutations changed in favour of the Gram Panchayat. Criminal case was registered against father of the petitioner as well as Halqa Patwari under Section 420 IPC, which was stated to be pending trial. A copy of self contained enquiry dated 1.12.1995 is available on record as Annexure P-12. While recording the abovesaid facts, learned District Collector, Faridabad, passed the impugned order dated 15.2.1996 (Annexure P-13), removing the petitioner from the post of Lambardar. Relevant operative part of the impugned order passed by the District Collector, which deserves to be noticed here, reads as under:- "I have heard both the parties and I have heard in detail Shri Kishan Singh and his learned counsel, from which it is found that the enquiry report of Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Palwal is based on true facts. The Munadi of Lambardar case does not appear to have been done and it appears that only formalities have been done. Refusal report of Sarpanch in the case of correction of Khasra Girdawari titled Goli Versus Gram Panchayat is also based on false facts. The fixing of the case at short dates and the ex parte order in the original Jimni file has been written later on. It does not bear the signatures of the Presiding Officer. Because this case had been instituted by his father Goli, therefore, he should not have witnesses in this case. By witnessing in this case he has clearly shown that he has helped his father irregularly and this has been done with the intention of grabbing the Gram Panchayat land which should not have been done by the Lambardar. Besides this, during the arguments it has also come to the light that this Lambardar has obtained loan to a person with the name of Shri Shish Ram and he has signed as witness No.1 in executing the equitable mortgage of the Gram Panchayat land. It is clear from all these facts that this Lambardar has misutilised the office of Lambardar and his appointment has also not been made according to rules. It is not in public interest for such a Lambardar to remain in the office of Lambardar because he will continue to do irregular verifications in which interests of people will be jeopardised i.e. one party will be unlawfully benefited and the other party will be unlawfully suffering loss. According to the above discussion, I order the removal of Shri Kishan Singh, Lambardar of the Backward Community of village Badhram, from the office of Backward community Lambardar. Tehsildar, Palwal, be informed that he should take action according to rules for filling this post. Order was pronounced.";