Comparative merits

Appointment of Lambardar – Appellate Authority’s Jurisdiction -- Collector appointed candidate who is substantially younger in age, being 40 years of age, whereas the petitioner is 52 years of age – Land holding is also 39 kanals 9 marlas in the village as against the 25 kanals of the petitioner – Appointed candidate also has experience as Sarbrah Lambardar, being nephew of the deceased Lambardar – The other criteria’s are by and large comparable -- Discretion exercised by the District Collector in the matter of appointment of Lambardar has to be accepted, in case it does not suffer from arbitrariness or perverse exercise of power – Held, the District Collector has taken into account the relevant merit factors, the Commissioner, while exercising appellate jurisdiction, committed an illegality in interfering with the same. Ranjit Singh v. Financial Commissioner, Animal Husbandary, Punjab & Ors., 2011(1) L.A.R. 309 (P&H).

Appointment of Lambardar – Speaking order – Collector passed the order for appointment of Lambardar, however particulars of the other candidate not taken into consideration while making appointment – Comparative merits of both the candidates not considered – Financial Commissioner remanded the case back to Collector – No legal flaw in the order of Financial Commissioner. Het Ram v. Financial Commissioner, Haryana & others, 2011(1) L.A.R. 308 (P&H).