Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 15 – Lambardari Case – Appointment of Lambardar – A person is involved in murder case and is confined in jail for the last two months – Other allegation is also there against him about outraging the modesty of two women of the village, in the report of AC Ist Grade-Cum-SDO(C) – It shows that, the person is of criminal bent of mind and also having shadow character – Such a person is totally unfit for the post of lambardar.

(Para 3)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887) – Section 16 – Lambardari Case – Appointment of lambardar – Choice of District Collector should not ordinarily be disturbed unless there are any compelling reasons to do so, or there is any infirmity in that order.

In the Lambardari proceedings it is more or less an accepted precedent that the choice of the District Collector should not ordinarily be disturbed unless there are any compelling reasons to do so, or there is any infirmity in that order. The petitioner has not been able to point out even a single such shortcoming which may warrant interference with the concurrent findings of the District Collector and as well as the Divisional Commissioner. Accordingly both the orders are upheld and the revision petition is dismissed as being devoid of any merit.

(Para 2)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 – Section 15, 16 – Lambardari Case -- Appointment of Lambardar – Appointment of Lambardar by Collector on the basis of report of Tehsildar – He cannot be debarred from appointment on post of Lambardar on the ground that his deceased father had encroached upon Panchayat land.

Khasra Girdawari according to which the land under alleged encroachment has been entered as “Mackbooja Panchayat Deh” and he no more remains an Encroacher after the death of the Respondent’s father.  The Respondent and his brother gave an application to the Gram Panchayat and to Tehsildar, Thanesar, for correction of Khasra Girdawari thereby, actively disassociating themselves from the entry of Encroachment in favour of their deceased father, Baru Ram.

The only stigma which could stand against respondent was about the alleged Encroachment recorded in the Revenue Record in favour of deceased father, who was Sarbra Lambardar of the father of the petitioner, Rulia Ram. The successors of Baru Ram has actively disassociated themselves from the entry of Encroachment and therefore, they are free from Stigma at present. Therefore, the very basis of the admission of the present R.O.R. in limine goes off and Petition is dismissed on the conclusive finding that the Respondent is more merited and he has been rightly appointed as Lambardar.

(Paras 4-5)