Bohar Singh vs The Financial Commissioner (Appeal), Punjab & Ors.

“xx xx xx

I have heard counsels for the parties and perused the order of the courts below. I have also gone through the submissions made by the parties and documents produced in support of their cases. The facts of the case reveal that in response to the proclamation, only the present respondent Bohar Singh and his brother Kulwant Singh applied for the post of lambardar. After getting the character antecedents of all the candidates verified from local police, the Tehsildar and SDM, Zira recommended name of the respondent Bohar Singh for appointment to the post of Lambardar. Before the District Collector, one Sarup Singh moved an application for the post of lambardar but the District Collector, Ferozepur rejected his application on account of not being filed within stipulated time and the District Collector, Ferozepur vide order dated 14.08.2013, appointed respondent Bohar Singh as lambardar of village Sadhar Wala, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur. Aggrieved by this, Gurinder Singh petitioner filed an appeal before Commissioner Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur who vide order dated 21.05.2015, dismissed the same. Thus, it is clear from the facts of the case that only the respondent and his brother Kulwant Singh applied for the post of lambardar and later on his brother Kulwant Singh withdrew his candidature in favour of the respondent Bohar Singh and the lower revenue authorities recommended the name of the respondent for the post of lambardar. Further, it is an admitted fact that FIR No. 178 dated 07.10.2006 under sections 420,467,468, 471 IPC as well as FIR No. 207 dated 13.01.2006 under sections 447,427,148.149 IPC were registered against the respondent. Although he has been ^{DINESH KUMAR} acquitted by the Ld. Trial Court but an accused who has been tried in a criminal case and thereafter acquitted, is yet to carry the stigma of being tried in a criminal case, depends on each case. These are the circumstances which would require serious consideration by the authorities. The circumstances leading to acquittal and whether the same would yet entail a stigma are to be considered in each case on the basis of material on record and other evidences. However, when another contesting candidate younger in age, enjoying clean image is available, then he should be preferred. If a person with criminal background is appointed, it would amount to contravention of Rule 15 which requires several factors including the age, reputation and character of the person to be appointed as lambardar. It is the duty of the revenue authorities that only a suitable candidate should be appointed for the post of Lambardar. The Hon'ble High Court in the case titled as Mohinder Pal versus The Financial Commissioner, Haryana & others report as 2013 (3) L.A.R.95 (P&H) has held that "Endeavour of the revenue authorities should be to appoint a person of clean image and most suitable out of the contesting candidates. But the Commissioner as well as the District Collector, Ferozepur have failed to consider these aspects. Thus, there is clear non-observance of the settled law by the Commissioner and the District Collector and the order dated 21.05.2015 passed by Commissioner, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur and order dated 14.08.2013 passed by District Collector, Ferozepur suffers from illegality and perversity.

Further, it is established that only the present respondent and his brother Kulwant Singh applied for the post of lambardar and later on Kulwant Singh withdrew his candidature in favour of his brother i.e. the present respondent, making the entire process to a collusive litigation and the respondent, has been appointed as lambardar without any challenge from other candidate. The natural justice requires that process should be carried out openly in the public domain, which seems to be missing in the present case. In this case, respondent the only candidate, participated in the race and won. To find out a suitable headman for a village is an important subject and if remanding the case could lead to the selection of a better headman, then it always a preferred path. The Punjab Land Revenue Rules, 1909 require that for appointment of lambardar there should be comparative merits of all the candidates and whoever got better merit he should be appointed as lambardar. For the appointment of lambardar in the State of Punjab, the qualification and relevant maters which requires to be considered are mentioned under Rule 15 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules 1909. The Rule 15 requires that in all appointments of headman, regard shall be had to among other matters such as (a) his hereditary claims; (b) the property in the estate possessed by the candidate to secure the recovery of land revenue; (c) services rendered to the State by himself or by his family; (d) his personal influence, character, ability and freedom from indebtedness; (e) the strength and importance of the community from which selection of a headman is to be made; (f) services rendered by himself or by his family in the national movements to secure freedom of India." In the present case, the respondent has himself admitted that FIR No. 178 dated 07.10.2006 under sections 420,467,468, 471 IPC as well as FIR No. 207 dated 13.01.2006 under sections 447,427,148,149 IPC were registered against him and he alongwith other co-accused, faced the criminal trial. District Collector while considering the merit of the respondent failed to consider the demerits of the respondent in view of the Rule 15 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules, 1909. In the present case, after scrutiny of the record, I find that the order dated 21.05.2015 passed by Commissioner, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur and order dated 14.08.2013 passed by District Collector, Ferozepur suffers from illegality and perversity and hence liable to be set aside.”