P L D (Rev (PLP)

SAIDULLAH KHAN, F. C.‑This is an application for revision against the order of the Commissioner, Rawalpindi Division dated the 20th October, 1951, by which he dismissed the appeal of Ghulam Rasul petitioner and upheld the order of the E.A.S.O., Gujrat exercising the powers of a Collector dated the 2nd December, 1949, appointing Nazar Muhammad respon dent as lambardar in place of his father Ghulam Haider who was dismissed on the score of having committed forgery in the revenue records. The following pedigree table will be of help in the disposal of this case :‑ Sheikh Ahmad ___________|_________ | | Ghulam Haider Ghulam Rasul | | Nazar Muhammad Muhammad Khan It would appear from a perusal of the above pedigree‑table that the petitioner is the elder brother of Ghulam Haider now dismissed and uncle of Nazar Muhammad respondent. On the death of Sheikh Ahmad lambardar father of Ghulam Rasul petitioner and Ghulam Haider dismissed lambardar the question of the appointment of a lambardar arose when Ghulam Rasul petitioner withdrew in favour of his brother Ghulam Haider since dismissed which resulted in the appointment of Ghulam Haider as lambardar vice Sheikh Ahmad deceased. The appoint ment of Ghulam Haider dismissed lambardar's son Nazar Muhammad as lambardar in place of his father has given rise, to the revision petition by Ghulam Rasul. The petitioner with his counsel and Nazar Muhammad in person present and heard. The sole contention of the learned counsel for the peti tioner in this case was that as Ghulam Haider father of Nazar Muhammad, respondent was charged with a heinous offence viz. forgery in the revenue records which involved moral turpitude his son Nazar Muhammad should not have been appointed by the learned Commissioner to the exclusion of Ghulam Rasul petitioner and elder brother of Ghulam Haider. It is common knowledge that once a person is passed over for appointment to the post of lambardari as was the case with Ghulam Rasul on the death of his father Sheikh Ahmad the contestant in the present case Ghulam Rasul was passed over for good the question of his appointment on the score of here ditary right will not arise. Again the dismissal of Ghulam Haider was effected as a result of I departmental enquiry which according to the concurrent findings of both the Collector and the Commissioner is not of such a nature as to ignore the claims of his son Nazar Muhammad. I, therefore, see no valid reason to ignore the unanimous findings for which cogent reasons exist for the appointment of Nazar Muhammad as lambardar in the vacancy caused by the removal of Ghulam Haider and I see no justification for interference with the order. Revision petition stands rejected. A. H. Petition rejected.