2000 PLP 2968 (YLR)

Khadim Hussar Qasar Respondent. A new post of Lambardar was created by the Commissioner, Gujranwala Division, Gujranwala vide his Order NO.RS.11‑1/3435, dated 6‑7‑1994. After fulfilment of modal formalities, the case was submitted to Deputy Commissioner/Collector for appointment of Lambardar against the newly created post out of 11 candidates. There were only two serious contestants namely Muhammad Nazir and Ansar Mehmood. The Field Staff Tehsildar and Assistant Commissioner in their report Submitted to Deputy Commissioner/Collector, had recommended the case of Muhammad Nazir son of Jehan Khan. After hearing the counsel of the two main parties, Deputy Commissioner/Collector considered Ansar Mehmood to be more suitable for the post of Lambardar than Muhammad Nazir. Aggrieved by this order of Deputy Commissioner/Collector Muhammad Nazir filed an appeal which was disposed of vide order, dated 15‑10‑1995. The order of Deputy Commissioner/Collector was upheld in the appeal.

2. The grounds which appealed to Deputy Commissioner/Collector in his selection of Ansar Mahmood as Headman of newly‑created post were the extent of holdings of the selectee, his educational qualification and freedom from debt or any other liability. The Commissioner also viewed these qualifications to confer on Ansar Mehmood a suitable edge over Muhammad Nazir.

3. It was stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner Muhammad Nazir that the said new post of Lambardar was created by the Commissioner on his request. It was argued that Ansar Mehmood, who was a landless owner in the estate, obtained land from his father through an oral gift during the pendency of case with Deputy Commissioner/Collector, thereby improving his landed status. It was stated that as held in PLD 1963 W.P. (Rev.) 17 and PLD 1959 W.P. (Rev.) 121. "A candidate acquiring some land as gift from his brother‑‑‑Gift temporary‑‑‑Not considered genuine". "Lambardar‑‑‑ Appointment‑‑‑ Candidate improving his status by acquiring land by gift from father to the exclusion of four other sons, five daughters and wife. Gift, held to be of suspicious character. Consequent improvement in property qualification ignored." It was asserted that disqualification attached to the candidature of the petitioner by the Deputy Commissioner/ Collector owing to the allegations of his being a defaulter of National Bank of Pakistan, Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan and Land Revenue was wrongly inferred from the reports submitted by the respondent, dated 12‑12‑1995 (A.B.D.P.), dated 19‑4‑1995 (N.B.P.) and, dated 15‑10‑1995 (Tehsildar, Phalia). Her submitted reports of A.D.B.P., Mandi Baha‑ud‑Din, (National Bank of Pakistan, Mandi Baha‑ud‑Din and Tehsiidar Phalia before the Commissioner during hearing of appeal to the effect that he was not a defaulter of any of the said institutions/agency. It was avered that on all accounts he was a better candidate than the respondent. The Deputy Commissioner/Collector and Commissioner erred in conferring better status and qualification on the respondent.

4. The learned counsel for the respondents stated that he was an owner of 212 Kanals and 1 Marla much before the date of passing of the order by the Deputy Commissioner/Collector. He was a young man of 22 years with F.A. qualification as against the age of petitioner which was 53 years and he has primary qualification. The authorities cited relating to improvement of landed status of the respondent during the pendency of the case for selection of Lambardar, were rebutted by alluding to the orders reported in P L D 1962 W.P. (Rev.)

112. In this authority, it is held that "if the candidate acquires more land during the pendency of case, than his improved landed status can be taken into consideration". It was, however, admitted that improvement in status after Collector's order had to be ignored. It was contended by the counsel for the respondent that Ansar Mehmood had not improved his landed status after the order of the Collector.

5. I have given careful consideration to the arguments of the parties. The reports of ADBP, N.B.P. and Tehsildar Phalia submitted during the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner/Collector clearly indicate that Muhammad Nazir was a defaulter. Subsequent negation of these reports at the time of hearing of appeal by the Commissioner are of no consequence and have to be ignored. It is a fact that Ansar Mehmood had more landed property than the petitioner at the time of decision by D.C./Collector. He on the score of age as well as qualification has a considerable edge over the present petitioner. The argument that a new post of Lambardar was created by the Commissioner on the request of the present petitioner cannot be solely made a ground for his suitability for the post.

6. In matters of appointment of Lambardar, unless the decision taken by the Collector is perverse, against the principles of natural justice or is patently bad, the Collector's orders ought not to be interfered with on the basis of slight variation in the qualifications of the candidates. In the instant case owing to the petitioner having poorer academic qualification and being a defaulter is left far behind in the competition.

7. The concurrent findings on facts by the lower Courts admit of no intervention in the revisional jurisdiction. Resultantly, the revision petition is dismissed. The impugned orders are upheld. H.B.T./15/Rev. Revision dismissed.