DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. - (1.) THE present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of order dated 16.1.2008 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala and order dated 20.5.2008 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Financial Commissioner, Haryana.
(2.) BRIEFLY the facts of the case are that on the death of Kreshan Chand, Lambardar of village Cholli, Tehsil Jagadhari, District Yamunanagar, the post of Lambardar fell vacant and the process for filling up the same was initiated. The Collector after considering the respective merits of the petitioner as well as of Respondent No. 4 appointed petitioner as Lambardar vide order dated 22.5.2007. The aforesaid order was challenged by respondent No. 4 by way of filing an appeal before the Commissioner, who vide order dated 16.1.2008 set aside the order passed by the Collector. The order passed by the Commissioner dated 16.1.2008 was further upheld by the Financial Commissioner vide order dated 20.5.2008. Mr. S.S. Dinarpur, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner was appointed as Lambardar by the Collector as he was found more meritorious than respondent No. 4 and the Commissioner as well as the Financial Commissioner have reversed the order of Collector without giving any finding. It has also been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that it is a settled law that the choice of Collector should not be interfered with by the appellate or the revisional authority and as such the order of the Collector has wrongly been set aside. Mr. Dinarpur further submitted that the order of Collector has been set aside only on the ground that the land of the petitioner, which has been transferred by his father in the name of the petitioner, has not been taken into consideration whereas it should have been taken into consideration. It has also been argued that order of the Collector has wrongly been set aside whereas a detailed speaking order has been passed by the Collector for appointment of the petitioner as Lambardar.
(3.) WE have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the orders passed by the authorities below.;