K.S.GAREWAL, J. - (1.) LAMBARDAR Atma Singh of Santa Patti, Manupur, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana died on June 8, 1997. Proclamation was issued in the village on August 21, 1997 inviting applications to fill up the vacant post. There were in all six applicants including Labh Singh, petitioner and Prem Singh respondent No. 3. Out of the six applicats one withdrew his claim in favour of Labh Singh and another candidate withdrew his claim in favour of Kesar Singh son of Atma Singh. Tehsildar recommended the name of Kesar Singh son of Atma Singh. Before Sub Divisional Officer, Kesar Singh son of Charan Singh gave up his claim in favour of Prem Singh respondent No. 3. Therefore, only three candidates remained before the Sub Divisional Officer, who recommended the name of Prem Singh. When the matter came up before the Collector all three namely, Kesar Singh, Prem Singh and Labh Singh were heard, their respective merits were considered and Labh Singh petitioner was found to be most meritorious candidate and he was accordingly appointed on March 31, 1998.
(2.) PREM Singh filed an appeal before the Commissioner which was accepted and the matter was remanded back to the Collector for a fresh decision. When the Collector again took up the matter after remand he decided in favour of Prem Singh, who was accordingly appointed. It was now Labh Singh's turn to file an appeal. The Commissioner was pleased to accept Labh Singh's appeal and appoint him in preference to Prem Singh. The ball was now in Prem Sing's court. Prem Singh filed revision petition before the Financial Commissioner who upheld the Commissioner Order on July 19, 2005. Prem Singh filed a review application which was accepted by the Financial Commissioner on January 21, 2008 and Prem Singh was found to be the better candidate in preference to Labh Singh. This is Labh Singh's petition for challenging Prem Singh's appointment as Lambardar.
(3.) WE record with dismay that claims for appointment to the office of Lambardar are subjected to so much litigation and take a lot of time. This is probably because much prestige is attached to the office. Would it not be better if some parameters or guideline are framed and the aspirants for the office are asked to submit a detailed biodata. Some sort of point system should also be evolved to take into consideration factors like age, hereditary claim, education, profession/occupation and social work etc. If guidelines are adopted and rules are amended it would help candidates to file better applications, there would be an element of transparency. The unsuccessful candidate may be dissuaded from pursuing the successful candidate through appeals/revisions/reviews.;