Petitioner challenged appointment of Lambardar based on demarcation report. Court held report manipulated as respondent was not part of demarcation; petitions dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CWP No.15540 of 2010
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.15540 of 2010 Date of decision:04.10.2010
Balbir Singh
..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana through the Financial Commissioner and Secretary, Department of Revenue, Haryana New Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh, and others ..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA
Present: Mr. Harish Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.
RAJIVE BHALLA, J.(ORAL)
The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the orders dated 27.11.2007, 20.01.2009 and 29.04.2009, passed by the Collector, Jind, the Commissioner, Hisar Division, Hisar and the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, respectively, appointing respondent no.4 as the Lambardar.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the demarcation report dated 22.07.2009, respondent no.4 has been found to be in unauthorised occupation of three marlas of Panchayat property. As a consequence, his selection as the Lambardar, stands vitiated and should be set aside.
I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the demarcation report dated 22.07.2009. The demarcation report appears to have been manipulated during pendency of proceedings, so as to dis-credit the selected candidate. A perusal of the demarcation report reveals that an application was filed by the petitioner before the Tehsildar, who directed the
CWP No.15540 of 2010
-2-
concerned Patwari to conduct a demarcation but respondent no.4 has not been associated with the demarcation. In this view of the matter, the demarcation report cannot be pressed into service to reject the selection of respondent no.4, by the Collector, duly affirmed by the Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner.
No merit. Dismissed.
04.10.2010 shamsher
[ RAJIVE BHALLA ] JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the demarcation report can be relied upon to reject the petitioner's selection as Lambardar when the respondent was not associated with the demarcation.
Balbir Singh
State of Haryana through the Financial Commissioner
Secretary, Department of Revenue, Haryana
Collector, Jind
Commissioner, Hisar Division
Financial Commissioner, Haryana
Rajive Bhalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
