Choice of Collector

Choice of Collector

Appointment of Lambardar – After considering the merits of the candidates, the Collector appointed the Lambardar -- Commissioner accepted the appeal in abject disregard to the limits of his jurisdiction as an appellate court and proceeded to reverse the order passed by the Collector by imposing his perception of the better candidate – Commissioner lost sight of a fundamental principle that governs selection of a Lambardar namely; that the choice of the Collector is final, except where it is palpably perverse, arbitrary, preposterous or contrary to the rules -- Financial Commissioner rightly restored the order passed by the Collector Kulwinder Singh v. Financial Commissioner (Appeals-II), Punjab and others, 2011(1) L.A.R. 201 (P&H).

Appointment of Lambardar – As the Collector granted the benefit of hereditary claim to the petitioner and ignored the better qualifications of respondent, the Commissioner rightly set aside the appointment of the petitioner and appointed respondent as the Lambardar. Satish Kumar v. State of Haryana and others, 2011(1) L.A.R. 607 (P&H).

Appointment of Lambardar -- Exercise of discretion by the Collector is always preferred – High Court cannot sit as a Court of appeal over the view expressed by the departmental authorities. Ruldu Singh v. Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Punjab and others, 2011(1) L.A.R. 82 (P&H DB).

Appointment of Lambardar -- It is an accepted practice in lambardari cases that other things being equal, the choice of the District Collector has to be respected unless and until there was something patently wrong with the order. Rajinder Singh v. Pipal Singh, 2011(1) L.A.R. 88 (FC Pb.).

Appointment of Lambardar – Where the choice of the Collector is perverse, arbitrary or violative of any rule, it cannot be final and may, circumstances so permitting be rectified by appellate or revisional authorities. Satish Kumar v. State of Haryana and others, 2011(1) L.A.R. 607 (P&H).