APURVA 2025.05.22 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh vide order dated 26.04.2016 (Annexure P-1), Ranjit . dated 26.04.2016 (Annexure P-1) (Annexure P-2). 2.4 Still (Annexure P-4). APURVA 2025.05.22 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh 26.04.2016 (Annexure P-1), which was maintained by the learned Divisional Commissioner, Jalandhar, vide order dated 16.01.2017 (Annexure P-2); however, learned Financial Commissioner has set aside the aforesaid orders and appointed respondent No.4 (Gurdial Singh) as Lambardar of Village Lassara, vide order dated 20.01.2020 (Annexure P-4), by observing as under:- “ - x - x - 6. I have heard counsels for the parties and perused the order of the courts below. I have also gone through the written arguments submitted by the parties and documents produced in support of their cases. On perusal of the record, I found that in this case, the process for inviting the application for the post of lambardar was initiated on 22.12.2008 and the petitioner applied for the post of lambardar. However, the process could not be completed and on 17.02.2016 again ‘munadi’ was conducted in the village without assigning any reason for cancellation of earlier ‘munadi’. Even no notice regarding the cancellation of earlier ‘munadi’ was served upon any persons which was very much mandatory because they were also candidates for the post of lambardar. In the earlier ‘munadi’ six candidates including Kulwant Singh, Piara Singh, Sohan Singh, Amrik Singh, Dharam Pal and Kashmir Singh applied for the post of lambardar. But again in the year 2016, ‘munadi’ was effected in the village Lassara, Tehsil Phillaur, District Jalandhar and the respondent no.4 became the candidate for APURVA 2025.05.22 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh the post of lambardar. From scrutiny of the record, I find that no reason for cancellation of the earlier ‘munadi’ was given by the Assistant Collector, Phillaur. There are presumptions that second ‘munadi’ might have been done at the instance of the respondent no.4 just to make him candidate. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the claim of the petitioner should be considered on merit. If again ‘munadi’ is ordered by this court for inviting fresh application for the post of lambardar, the entire process will re-start and will amount to huge delay in this case resulting into keeping lower revenue authorities busy again for initiating the de-novo proceedings. Therefore, it would be better solution to consider the merits of both the candidates at this level. In this case the petitioner is ex- serviceman and retired as ‘subedar’ major from the army. Rule 15 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules, provides that in all first appointments of headman, regard shall be had; to the services rendered to the State by himself or by his family; (d) his personal influence, character, ability and freedom from indebtedness; (e) the strength and importance of the community from which selection of a headman is to be made; (f) services rendered by himself or by his family in the national movements to secure freedom of India. Thus, these factors which should be considered at the time of appointment of lambardar. It is the duty of the Collector to appoint such persons in the office of Lambardar after considering the merits and demerits of all the candidates and keeping in view the Punjab Land Revenue Rules. But, in the present case, neither the Collector nor the Commissioner has given any reason for rejecting the claim of petitioner. Moreover, the Commissioner in his order dated 16.01.2017 did not assign any reason for dismissing the appeal of the petitioner. Thus, there is perversity in the orders of the District Collector and it requires intervention of this Court. 7. Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and relevant law pertaining to appointment of APURVA 2025.05.22 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh lambardar, I accept the present revision petition and order dated 16.01.2017 passed by Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar and order dated 26.04.2016 passed by the District Collector, Jalandhar are set aside and the petitioner is appointed as lambardar. ‘Sanad lambardari’ be issued in his favour. Copy of this order be communicated to the courts below. File be consigned to the record room.” 5.1 A perusal of the above extracted findings would show that there was a dispute as regards the issuance of proclamation (mustri munadi) for inviting applications for the post of Lambardar. Although, the proceedings regarding appointment of Lambardar are stated to have been initiated, way back in the year 2008, however, it appears that in the year 2016, another proclamation was conducted in Village Lassara. It is the categoric case of petitioner that respondent No.4 (Gurdial Singh) had never applied for the post of Lambardar, in pursuance of proclamation made in the year 2016. Be that as it may; the competent authority to order fresh proclamation, is the District Collector. During the course of hearing of the instant case, a specific query was raised to learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the respective parties, to show the orders passed by the District Collector regarding issuance of fresh proclamation for filling up the vacant post of Lambardar; however, no response was forthcoming. 6. Considering the totality of circumstances, especially the fact that no order indicating approval by the District Collector for making fresh proclamation (mustri munadi) has been shown and also considering that in the process of selection, a wide choice must be available to the concerned authority in order to apprise the merits/demerits of competing candidates, so as to find the best person for being appointed as Lambardar of the Village, I deem it appropriate to set aside order dated 26.04.2016 (Annexure P-1) APURVA 2025.05.22 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh passed by the learned Collector, Jalandhar, order dated 16.01.2017 (Annexure P-2) passed by the learned Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar and order dated 20.01.2020 (Annexure P-4) passed by the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab. Let the matter be placed before the learned Collector, Jalandhar, for passing necessary order for initiating fresh process for filling up the vacant post of Lambardar of Village Lassara, Tehsil Phillaur, District Jalandhar, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. 7. The present writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 8. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed. APURVA 2025.05.22 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh