P L D 1959 W (PLP)

M. B. Zaman for Respondent. The Collector appointed the appellant as a Lambardar of Patti Pritam Singh, in Chak No. 55/G.B., Tehsil Jaranwala. On appeal the Commissioner set aside this order and appointed the respon dent as Lambardar of the Patti. Both the parties are Jats. The appellant's family has military service to its credit and he was recommended by the Revenue Officers as the best candidate. He owns 173 kanals and l8 marlas of land valued at Rs. 32,606‑4‑0 and has read upto the Middle Standard. He worked as a temporary Lambardar for two years. A certificate given by the Tahsildar, Jaranwala, shows that his collection was satisfactory. Consequent on his appointment as Lambardar by the Collector, he recovered the land revenue for Rabi 1957. The respondent owns 18 kanals and 4 marlas of land valued at Rs. 3,506 as against the Zar‑Bharat of Rs. 6,941‑8‑

0. He acted as a temporary Lambardar. The A. N. T. and the N. T. have both reported that his landed property is insufficient as security for the land revenue. It was contended on his behalf that he has got 35 kanals of land in Bahawalpur. This is Abadkari land, but it was contended that the Zar Milkiat has been paid. The entries in the copy of the Fard Taqsim, produced before the Commissioner, show that:‑ (i) the land is under instalments; and (ii) that the Zar Milkiat has been paid but Patta‑Milkiat has not been executed. These two entries are conflicting and are not adequate ‑proof that the Zar‑Milkiat has been paid. The respondent has not been able to produce the receipt in token of having paid the Zar‑Milkiat. It would thus appear that the property held by the respondent the time of the Collector's order was in adequate. There was no justification for appointing him as Lambardar when another suit able candidate with sufficient security was available. In view of what has been stated above, it is not necessary to discuss in detail whether the respondent has a hereditary claim. He could not produce the usual Central Record Room certificate. He based his claim on the Shajra‑nasab and had certain certificates issued by officers in the East Punjab. The last of these certificates is dated 1939, in which the respondent's father has been described as a Lambardar. The fact that no certificate for the subsequent 7 years could be produced makes his claim suspicious, but as I had already indicated, it is not necessary to come to a finding on this point. It has been held in numerous rulings that the Collector's finding should not be interfered with in such cases unless it is perverse or unreasonable. That is not so in the present case. The result is that the appeal is allowed and the order‑of the Collector, appointing the appellant as Lambardar is restored. K. M. A. Appeal allowed.