Parvinder Singh v. Financial Commissioner Punjab And Others

Petitioner (Parvinder Singh) has filed the instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside order dated 26.10.2020 (Annexure P-4) passed by the learned Collector, Rupnagar, whereby respondent No.6 (Harpreet Singh) was appointed as Lambardar of Village Bela, Tehsil Sri Chakaur Sahib, District Rupnagar, Punjab. 1.1 A further prayer has been made for setting aside order dated 30.11.2023 (Annexure P-2) passed by the learned Financial Commissioner, Punjab, whereby an appeal preferred by respondent No.6 (Harpreet Singh) against order dated 05.04.2022 (Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Divisional Commissioner, Rupnagar, has been allowed. 1.2 Another prayer has been made for setting aside order dated 14.03.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Financial Commissioner,

Punjab, thereby dismissing the review application filed by the petitioner (Parvinder Singh).

2.

Village Bela, Tehsil Sri Chakaur Sahib, District Rupnagar, Punjab Bela, vide order dated 26.10.2020 (Annexure P-4).

dated 26.10.2020 (Annexure P-4) 05.04.2022 (Annexure P-3), whereby the matter was remanded to the learned Collector, Rupnagar for deciding the matter afresh.

2.4 Being dissatisfied with the aforesaid order dated 05.04.2022 (Annexure P-3), respondent No.6 (Annexure P-2);

thereby setting aside order dated 05.04.2022 (Annexure P-3) and restoring

the Collector's order dated 26.10.2020 (Annexure P-4). 2.5 Thereafter, the petitioner filed a review application against order dated 30.11.2023 (Annexure P-2) before the learned Financial Commissioner, Punjab, which was dismissed vide order dated 14.03.2024 (Annexure P-1).

5.

Here, it would be apposite to state the relative merits of the petitioner and respondent No.6 (as noticed by the learned Collector, Rupnagar) , it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that in the matter of appointment of Lambardar, age of a candidate is a relevant factor. It is also well established that recommendations of revenue officers have a pursuasive value.

The learned Collector, Rupnagar, while appreciating the relative

merits and demerits of all the candidates, found respondent No.6 to be a more suitable candidate. The learned Collector further observed that petitioner (Parvinder Singh) had acted as a Sarbrah Lambardar even after the death of his father. However, it is well settled that a Sarbrah Lambardar can discharge the duties of a Lambardar only during the lifetime of the original Lambardar.

6.1 Be that as it may, the learned Collector, vide order dated 26.10.2020 (Annexure P-4), appointed respondent No.6 as the Lambardar of Village Bela.

6.2 Upon appeals being filed by the petitioner as well as one Sh. Satnam Singh, the learned Divisional Commissioner, Rupnagar, vide order dated 05.04.2022 (Annexure P-3), remanded the matter to the Collector for a fresh decision, though without setting aside the Collector's order dated 26.10.2020 (Annexure P-4).

Sarbrah Lambardar, therefore, he deserved preference for appointment as Lambardar. 8.1 I have considered the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, however, I do not find any merit in the same.

a 09.07.2025 Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.2217 of 2024 titled as "Murti Devi Vs. State of Haryana & Ors.", wherein it has been observed as under: order dated 05.04.2022 (Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Divisional Commissioner, Rupnagar

and restored order dated 26.10.2020 (Annexure P-4) passed by the learned Collector, Rupnagar, whereby respondent No.6 (Harpreet Singh) was appointed as Lambardar of Village Bela.

and the same is accordingly dismissed.

11.

All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed.