Appointment of Lambardar

Choice of Collector -- Decision of the Collector can only be upset when higher authorities or this Court finds that Collector has been mislead by irrelevant factors or has escaped any important material while considering the candidature or action of the Collector seems to be out of extraneous consideration. Amarjit Kaur v. Financial Commissioner (Co-operation), Punjab and others, 2011(3) L.A.R. 89 (P&H).

Choice of Collector – Interference in -- Respondent No.4 is more educated -- No disability or ineligibility in the merit of respondent No.4 can be traced -- Merit is comparative -- Grand father of respondent No.4 was a Lambardar, it cannot be ruled out that respondent No.4 has some experience of lambardari -- Discretion exercised by the District Collector is not perverse in any manner or arbitrary in effect -- No interference in the order of District Collector was called for. Kuldeep Singh v. State of Haryana & others, 2011(3) L.A.R. 81 (P&H).

Choice of Collector -- Neither Divisional Commissioner nor Financial Commissioner had recorded any finding that the Collector has over-looked any important material, which would have resulted in the different opinion or action of the Collector is out of extraneous consideration or Collector was mislead by placing irrelevant record before him -- Order of the Collector ought not to have been disturbed by the authorities below. Amarjit Kaur v. Financial Commissioner (Co-operation), Punjab and others, 2011(3) L.A.R. 89 (P&H).

Good Character – Acquittal from criminal case -- Effect of -- A person with clean record and good character is required to be appointed as Lambardar who would command respect of the residents in the Estate -- Although petitioner has been acquitted, however, for quite a length of time, criminal proceedings were pending against him in trial -- Apprehension of the Financial Commissioner, that residents of the village would not have due regard for the petitioner so as to give him information as required in discharge of functions by a Lambardar, cannot be said to be without reasonable basis -- No ground for judicial review of the impugned order. Narender Kumar v. Financial Commissioner, Revenue, Haryana & others, 2011(3) L.A.R. 110 (P&H).

Owning of School – Effect of -- Merely because petitioner is running a school, would not mean that she will not be available in the village to perform duties of Lambardar -- Petitioner gave sufficient explanation that she has engaged several teachers and staff in the school to look after the management, other jobs and teaching activities, therefore, presence of the petitioner in the school regularly is not required – Held, merely because, Lambardar is running a school in the nearby city, cannot be a basis to create doubt that in future she would not be available in the village to discharge duties of Lambardar. Amarjit Kaur v. Financial Commissioner (Co-operation), Punjab and others, 2011(3) L.A.R. 89 (P&H).

Qualification – Involvement in commercial activities – Effect of -- If other qualities or qualifications of the candidate are appealing and he is permanent resident of the village and ordinarily residing in the same village, his candidature should not be refused solely on the ground that he is engaged in some commercial activities near the village to earn his livelihood. Amarjit Kaur v. Financial Commissioner (Co-operation), Punjab and others, 2011(3) L.A.R. 89 (P&H).

Qualification -- Whether a Lambardar is expected to be unemployed or merely engaged in agricultural activities? – Held, Lambardar cannot be expected to be an unemployed or merely engaged in agricultural activities. Amarjit Kaur v. Financial Commissioner (Co-operation), Punjab and others, 2011(3) L.A.R. 89 (P&H).