Amar Singh vs Raghbir Singh

K.S. Narang, F.C.

This is a revision petition against the order dated 2nd November, 1981 of the Commissioner, Ferozepur, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner, against the order dated 20.1.1981 of the Collector, Bhatinda, appointing Raghbir Singh (respondent) as Lambardar of Patti Hazar Khan of the village Joyeen, Tehsil Mansa.

Facts of the case have been given in the orders of the Collector and the Commissioner. After examining the claims of Amar Singh and Raghbir Singh, the Collector appointed Raghbir Singh as a Lambardar, being the most suitable candidate, by his order dated 20.1.1981. Amar Singh filed an appeal before the Commissioner, who by his order dated 2.11.1981 rejected it, upholding the choice of the Collector. Against this order Amar Singh has filed this revision petition.

The assertions made by Shri Sidhu, counsel for Amar Singh are that the petitioner held more land and wielded more influence; that the respondent was involved in a murder case, and as such was not a fit to be appointed as Lambardar. The fresh pleas taken by the counsel before me are that the petitioner held the post of Lambardar in village Mattewal, district Bhawalpur (now in Pakistan) and that the respondent could not be appointed as Lambardar of the Patti when his father, Nand Singh was still alive. The counsel for the respondent has opposed these contentions and has objected that these pleas are irrelevant and frivolous and also could not be taken into consideration at the revisional stage when these were not taken in appeal before the Commissioner.

I have heard the parties and gone through the record. The following observations of the Collector, subsequently upheld by the Commissioner, call for no interference :

"I am inclined to agree with the recommendations of all the Revenue Officers that shall Raghbir Singh is to be preferred. He owns more land, is more literate and also commands considerable influence in the area. It is true that there was a murder case in which he was involved, but he has since been acquitted and this fact cannot be held against him. On the other hand, Amar Singh, is admittedly a Lambardar of one of the other Pattis of the village and his claim for being so appointed for another Patti is somewhat unreasonable."

This fact the Amar Singh is already working as a Lambardar of one Patti, waters down his claim to be appointed as Lambardar of the other Patti, in view of the ruling of the Financial Commissioner, Punjab, reported in 1968 LLT221 Re: Sohan Singh v. Major Bakhtawar Singh, which runs as under :

"Held, that where a person was not appointed Lambardar by the Collector on the ground that he was already a Lambardar in a different Patti in the village ought not to have been appointed as such by the Commissioner on condition that he would resign from the lambardari already held by him."

No irregularity or illegality has been shown to me to have been committed by the subordinate Revenue Officers in exercising their choise and in the circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with their well considered choice in favour of Raghbir Singh. Accordingly, I dismiss the revision petition of Amar Singh as without force.

Announced.