Satish Kumar vs Fiancial Commissioner Haryana And Ors

1-
LPA-2294-2026 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(127)
LPA-2294-2026
Date of decision:- 02.11.2026
Satish Kumar ... Petitioner
Versus
Financial Commissioner, Haryana, Department of Town and Country
Planning, Haryana and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH GAUR
Present:- Mr. U.K.Agnihotri, Advocate,
Mr. Bhag Singh, Advocate and
Mr. Saksham Ahlawat, Advocate,
for the appellant.

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. ( ORAL )
1. Assailing judgment dated 14.07.2026 passed by the learned Single
Judge, appellant has filed the present appeal under Clause X of the Letters
Patent.
2. Mr. U.K.Agnihotri, counsel for the appellant, submits that by virtue
of order dated 23.07.2019, Annexure P-2, appellant was appointed as a
Lambardar by the District Collector, but the order was set aside in appeal by
the Divisional Commissioner on 29.09.2021, Annexure P-3, and private
respondent No.4 was appointed in his place. He states that matter was taken up
before the Financial Commissioner in a revision petition, which was dismissed
on 21.04.2026, Annexure P-4. Counsel submits that appellant filed a writ
KAMAL SHARMA
2026.11.05 17:50
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh.

2-
LPA-2294-2026 -
petition (CWP-18899-2026), which has been disposed of by the learned Single
Judge vide the impugned judgment, setting aside the appointment of
respondent No.4. But instead of appointing the appellant, learned Single Judge
has directed the authorities to re-initiate the process in accordance with law.
Counsel contends that the process of appointment of Lambardar commenced
after the death o f previous Lambardar, Karnail Singh, in 2004 and despite a
lapse of more than two decades, the process has not culminated. At this stage,
a limited prayer has been made by him to direct the authorities to conclude the
proceedings in a time bound manner.
3. Advance copy of the appeal has been served upon official
respondents.
4. On asking of the Court, Ms. Svaneel Jaswal, Additional Advocate
General, Haryana, puts in appearance on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. She
points out that both, appellant and private respondent No.4, were arraigned as
accused in criminal cases. She submits that in so far as appellant is concerned,
he was named as an accused in two criminal cases, one of which had been
lodged against him allegedly for outraging the modesty of a woman. She states
that although, appellant has been acquitted in both the cases, but his conduct
was required to be taken into consideration before his request for appointment
is finally decided. In so far as private respondent No.4 is concerned, State
counsel points out that out of the two criminal cases registered against him, he
has been acquitted in one case and the second case lodged against him is under
Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, which pertains to theft of electricity.
It is her categorical assertion that the moral conduct of both the contesting
parties makes them unfit for appointment to the post of Lambardar. She has
KAMAL SHARMA
2026.11.05 17:50
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh.

3-
LPA-2294-2026 -
also invited the attention of the Court to a Division Bench judgment of this
Court in Sukhbir Singh Versus Financial Commissioner, (Revenue), Punjab
and others, Law Finder Doc Id # 2948688, to support her assertion.
5. Countering her, counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon
Shri @ Siri Niwar Versus State of Haryana and others, Law Finder Doc Id #
439971 , to emphasize that as appellant stands acquitted, his involvement in a
criminal case cannot stand in the way for appointment as a Lambardar.
6. We have heard counsel for the parties and given a thoughtful
consideration to the arguments arguments by them.
7. Noticing the judicial precedents in Sukhbir Singh’s case ( supra ),
this Court observed as under:-
“ 8. In Major Singh's case (supra), it was observed
that even though one of the candidates had a criminal case,
though he was later acquitted, which may not be a
disqualification, but it is a relevant factor to be considered,
to be taken into account while considering the comparative
merit of the candidates. As the appointee had functioned as a
Sarbrah Lambardar for about 10 years and was younger in
age as compared to a person who was of advanced age, this
Court held that a person with experience in Lambardari
should be appointed. A similar view has been expressed by
this Court in Amandeep Singh Vs. State of Punjab and
others, 2011 (4) SCT 18 .
9. In Ishwar Singh Vs. Satbir Singh and others,
(2009)9 SCC 392 , Apex Court has observed that a
Lambardar is the village headman and his main job is
collection of land revenue. He is paid fixed remuneration as
well as some commission. The criteria for appointment to the
post of Lambardar, inter alia includes educational
qualification, age, experience in working of Lambardari,
KAMAL SHARMA
2026.11.05 17:50
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh.

4-
LPA-2294-2026 -
land and property, character, ability and freedom from
indebtedness.”
8.
Be that as it may, considering the limited prayer made by the
appellant, this Court does not intend to examine the merits of the appeal, nor
does it intend to go into the eligibility and competence of either the appellant
or private respondent No.4.
9.
Accordingly, this Court directs the District Collector to issue a fresh
advertisement for appointment of a Lambardar/Headman in the village,
inviting applications from all eligible applicants. The entire process of
appointment shall be completed within a period of six months. The selection of
Lambardar shall be made by the District Collector, keeping in view the
judgment passed by this Court in Sukhbir Singh’s case ( supra ).
10. With the above direction, Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of.
(SUVIR SEHGAL)
JUDGE
( RAJESH GAUR )
JUDGE
02.11.2026
Kamal
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
KAMAL SHARMA
2026.11.05 17:50
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh.