Allowed

Shamsher Singh v. Financial Commissioner and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Oct 2010CWP/18161/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's writ petition. It set aside the order of the Financial Commissioner and remitted the matter to consider the conviction and sentence of a candidate (respondent no.2) while deciding the revision, directing all other pleas to be taken into account.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; matter remitted to Financial Commissioner to decide revision afresh considering the conviction of respondent no.2.

Shamsher Singh Vs Financial Commissioner and… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

CWP No.18161 of 2009

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.18161 of 2009 Date of decision:11.10.2010

Shamsher Singh

..... Petitioner

Versus

Financial Commissioner, Appeals-II, Punjab, Chandigarh and others

¶9

..... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA

¶11

Present: Mr.B.D.Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Anu Pal, AAG, Punjab for respondent no.1. Mr.R.S.Chauhan, Advocate for the caveator/respondent no.2.

¶12

¶13

RAJIVE BHALLA, J.(ORAL)

¶14

The petitioner impugns the order dated 18.03.2009, passed by the Financial Commissioner, Appeals-II, Punjab, Chandigarh.

¶15

Counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the conviction of respondent no.2, though during the pendency of the dispute, the Financial Commissioner should have set aside his appointment. The Financial Commissioner has, however, rejected this argument by holding that this allegation has not been proved on record.

¶16

Counsel for the private respondent submits that as the private respondent was convicted and sentenced but has been released on probation by the appellate court, the impugned order does not call for interference.

¶17

Be that as it may, as conviction of a candidate is a relevant fact while weighing the merits/demerits of candidates, the Financial Commissioner was required to consider this fact. The Financial Commissioner surprisingly, refused to consider the conviction and sentence

¶18

CWP No.18161 of 2009

¶19

-2-

¶20

of respondent no.2, on the ground that it has not been proved.

¶21

The writ petition is therefore, allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Financial Commissioner, Appeals-II, Punjab, Chandigarh. to decide the revision, afresh and in accordance with law within three months after taking into consideration the conviction and sentence of respondent no.2 and all such other pleas that parties may choose to urge.

¶22

Parties are directed to appear before the Financial Commissioner, Appeals-II, Punjab, Chandigarh, on 19.11.2010.

¶23

During the pendency of the revision before the Financial Commissioner, respondent no.2 shall be allowed to perform the duties of the Lambardar.

¶24

11.10.2010 [ RAJIVE BHALLA ] shamsher JUDGE

Shamsher Singh v. Financial Commissioner and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamsher Singh v. Financial Commissioner and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balraj Singh Dhillon & Anr. Vs Tarwinder Singh

Sampuran Singh Vs Directore Land Records Punjab and Anr.

Baljit Singh Vs Sinder Kaur and Ors.

Joginder Singh Vs State of Pb.Etc.

Rana Harinder Vs Gunita & Ors.

Surjit Kaur Vs Financial Commissioner and Ors.