Lambardar

Lambardari neither can be termed as profession nor a post against any profit, rather the Headman who holds an honorary post acts as bridge inter se the landowners and Revenue Authority

Holding office of Lambardar is not a vested right of any person to claim his selection against said post

Such is absolute choice of Revenue Authority to appoint a suitable candidate per yardstick set out in R. 17 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules, 1968 for discharging the obligations assigned to him via terms of its R. 22

Object thereof would be that person best suited for the said post should be committed to facilitate the administration, so that command and control over the State land, Exchequer besides other affairs could be maintained.

Contention of appellant that he was 'Arain' by caste and 70% of the community in the revenue estate was 'Arain' while the candidate appointed as Lambardar belongs to the 'Jat' caste, which only had a ratio of 30% in the community

Validity

Rule 17(e) of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules, 1968 provided that while making the appointment of Headmen, regard should be given to the strength and importance of the community from which selection of a headman was to be made

Appellant did belong to the majority 'Arain" caste in the community

Fora below had not taken into consideration R. 17(e) of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules, 1968

No substantial reasons or grounds for by-passing the said Rule were given by the fora below

Supreme Court sent the case back to the Member (Judicial), Provincial Board of Revenue for deciding the case afresh in view of the relevant rules

Appeal was disposed of accordingly.

Petitioner filed application for appointment of Lamberdar on the death of earlier Lamberdar which was accepted by the District Officer (Revenue)

Respondent filed appeal against the said appointment which was accepted and he was appointed as Lamberdar

Validity

Concurrent findings of fact had been recorded by the revenue authorities

Respondent had land measuring 61-kanals and 7-marlas which was sufficient for Zar-e-Bharat

Respondent had already rendered services as Sarbrah Lamberdar for a long time and he was well versed with the duties of the post

Petitioner had higher education qualification as compared to respondent

To be appointed as Lamberdar was not the vested right

Concurrent findings recorded by the revenue authorities were in accordance with law

Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances.

Any person who was a government/civil servant was not eligible to be appointed to the post of Lambardar.

Candidate for the post of Lambardar not qualifying for the same on the cut-off date set-out for applying to the post, but attaining the threshold of eligibility before passing of appointment order by the competent authority/Deputy District Officer (Revenue) (DDOR)

Petitioner applied for the post of Lambardar during his service as a Government servant, however since his service was an impediment to his appointment to the post, therefore, he retired from Government service before the matter of appointment was finally decided by the Deputy District Officer (Revenue) (DDOR)

Deputy District Officer (Revenue) appointed respondent to the post of Lambardar as he was considered to be better than other candidates including the petitioner, however no specific comparison of qualifications was made

Appeals filed by petitioner before Executive District Officer (Revenue) and Board of Revenue (Board) respectively were also dismissed, however review petition filed by petitioner before the Board was accepted and after drawing comparisons between qualification of petitioner and respondent, petitioner was appointed to the post of Lambardar

Constitutional petition filed by respondent before High Court against review order of Board was accepted and it was held that no case for review was made out within the parameters of S.8 of West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act, 1957

Contention on behalf of respondent was that petitioner was not qualified for the post of Lambardar as date of filing of application by a candidate was relevant for considering his eligibility or ineligibility for the post and not any subsequent event

Validity

Relevance and importance of the date for applying to the post (Lambardar) was primarily meant to ascertain as to who were the persons interested in the job, so that they could come forward and apply for the same by a given date

Candidate who did not cross the threshold of qualification or where there was an impediment in his way at the date of applying for appointment, but crossed the threshold or removed the hurdle in his way while the matter was being processed and scrutinized and before final decision was taken by the competent forum, such candidate/applicant, notwithstanding the ineligibility on the date of applying should be considered by the revenue authorities for the post/assignment

Petitioner, being a Government servant, applied within the given time, and after knowing that his Government service was an impediment to his appointment to the post, he sacrificed his Government job and sought early retirement, and all of this was done before any final order of appointment could be passed by the Deputy District Officer (Revenue) (DDOR)

Petitioner had become eligible for consideration in such circumstances, but he was discarded by the Deputy District Officer (Revenue) (DDOR) without assigning any good reasons or comparison of his qualifications with the respondent

Petitioner was also illegally ignored by Executive District Officer (Revenue) and Board of Revenue (Board), which subsequently reviewed its order in terms of S.8 of West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act, 1957, read with O. XLVII, R.1, C.P.C.

High Court should have not interfered with the review order passed by the Board, especially when it was visible on the record that the petitioner in all respects, such as, land holding, education, antecedents etc. was more suitable for the job than the respondent

Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal by Supreme Court and allowed, impugned order of High Court was set aside and the review order passed by the Board was upheld.

No person had a vested right to be appointed as a Lambardar, rather Revenue authorities made a selection for the post as per criteria set out in Rule 17 of West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968 and had to find the most suitable candidate for the job who could capably discharge the duties inter alia in terms of Rule 22 of the said Rules.

Respondent Lambardar was allotted land in another village as no State land was available in the village of his appointment

Appellant assailed the allotment on the ground that the land had already been allotted to him, resultantly allotment was cancelled but High Court while interpreting words "joining village/adjoining villages" in clause 8(a) of Notification dated 17-1-2006, held that State land in any village in the Tehsil could be allotted to Lambardar

Validity

No distinction could be drawn between "joining and adjoining" and word "joining village" was superfluous

"Joining" or "adjoining" village or villages were those which were physically contiguous to and share a common border with village of respondent Lambardar and would not include village or villages which were not physically connected with village of Lambardar

Village, where land was allotted to respondent, was located not contiguous to village where respondent had been appointed as Lambardar

Land in question did not fall within scope of clause 8(a) of Notification dated 22-10-2007 and High Court had fallen in error in allowing petition filed by respondent and declaring the grant void

Supreme Court set aside the judgment passed by High Court and restored that of Board of Revenue

Appeal was allowed.

No restriction could be imposed on a citizen to contest for such seat, if eligible to compete therefore, for same being his fundamental right.

-Landlord under S.2 (c)(i) of West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, could be any person, who was for the time being, entitled to receive rent in respect of any building whether on his own account or on behalf of or for the benefit of any other person

Not necessary that in order to fall within the definition of landlord, a person must be the owner of the building or rented land

Person may not be the owner of the building,. but still could be its landlord and it could even be vice versa in the shape that a person could be the owner of the property, but he would not fall within the definition of "landlord" and as such could not claim to be the landlord of the building qua the tenant on the basis of his simple ownership-

Person who asserted himself as the landlord of the building and claimed that a particular person was tenant under him, had to establish either through documentary or unimpeachable oral evidence that the particular person was his tenant.

Leave to appeal granted to consider contentions that civil Courts were not competent to entertain suit of respondent on account of bar contained in S.36 of Act (V of 1912) and since objection in this regard went to the very root of jurisdiction of civil Courts, High Court ought not to have declined to consider it, and that finding of Trial Court was based upon misreading of evidence.

Appointment of successor-Order of Commissioner and Board of Revenue deciding question of succession to deceased Lambardar according to rule of primogeniture-Held, neither without lawful authority nor lacking in legal effect.

Crucial factor. Appointment rests in discretion of graded hierarchy of Revenue Officers-Such officers in view of their experience and training better qualified to make choice than Courts of general jurisdiction-Case of appointment as lambardar

Not to be approached like those of disputes relating to property or franchise-Contention that petitioner being nearer consanguine relation as compared to respondent was "nearest eligible heir" and as such had referential claim to appointment, held, misconceived.

Appointment of-Major portion of area comprised in Patti belonging to Government-Heredity not determining factor in appointment of Lambardas in circumstances-Appointment to be made under suo-rule (i) of r. 17 West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1961

Appointment-Question of suitability of candidate for appointment-To be considered by competent authority-Mere non-compliance with any particular rule and failure to consider such rule no ground for review-Supreme Court Rules, 1956, O. XXVI, r.5.

Appointment of-Land chiefly owned by Government-Hereditary claim to office of Lambardari cannot be token into consideration-Retired Deputy Secretary to [Government Could be appointed Lambardar-Selection of Lambardar entirely within discretion of Revenue Authorities-High Court, held, right in not interfering with such order under Art. 98 of Constitution of Pakistan (1962)-West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968, r. 19-Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98.

Lambardar-Office of lambardar could not be claimed as of a right-High Court, held, right in dismissing writ petition in limine.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Choice of Collector In selection of Lambardar-Not ordinarily to be interfered with if he exercises his discretion in reasonable manner and selection not perverse or contrary to law.

Appointment-Order of local authorities challenged after 4 years of appointment-High Court, held, rightly refused to interfere with discretion exercised by relevant authorities.

(b) Punjab Land Revenue Rules, r. 17 (ii) (c)-Contention that r. 17 (ii) (c) applies only to a case of first appointment and not to case of appointment in subsequent vacancy in Office of Lambardar - Held : there is nothing in Rules to warrant such differentiation- Special Leave to Appeal refused.

Lambardar Lambardar-(Government Chak)-Death of appointee pending appeal against him-Claims of all candidates to be considered while appointing successor.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Temporary Lambardar cannot be ignored in appointing permanent Lambardar on ground of complaints 12 years old, for which suitable action had been taken against him.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Temporary Lambardar cannot claim as of right to be appointed permanently.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment on dismissal of previous Lambardar made on basis of r. 17 (i) (a) instead of r. 17 (iii), Punjab Land Revenue Rules-Appointment set side with direction to make fresh appointment.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment - Candidate, a Canal Patwari, owning no land in patti, cannot be appointed.

Lambardar Lambardar - Appointment - Candidate belonging to majority community, one of the considerations for appointment.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Vacancy caused on dismissal of Lambardar-Hereditary claim of candidate one of the factors to be taken into consideration.

Not debarred from being considered for post of Lambardar-Punjab Land Revenue Rules, r. 16(ii)(c).

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Absentee heir may not be appointed as Lambardar-Punjab Land Revenue Rules, rr. 16(ii) (c) & 17(ii).

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Lambardars in other two pattis belonging to Awan community-Awans pre-dominating community in third patti-Appointment to be based on administrative considerations.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment by Colonization Officer, Thal Development Authority-Appeal lies to Commissioner arid not to Chairman, Thal Development Authority.

Lambardar Appointment of Lambardar of Chak carved out of old village-Hereditary claims of candidate can be taken into consideration-Refugees and locals form one community.

Lambardar -Petition filed after 90 days - No ground for condoning delay-Revision to be rejected as time-barred.

Permanent appointment in place of non-Muslim Lambardar to be governed by r. IS of Punjab Land Revenue Rules.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Candidate belonging to majority community and more educated-Appointment upheld.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Resigning Lambardar's brother can be appointed in his place-Rule 17(ii)(b)(1), Punjab Land Revenue Rules has no application.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Two posts already given to majority community-Third post in interest of administration should go to other community.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-All factors mentioned in r. 15, Punjab Land Revenue Rules to be taken into consideration at time of appointment.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Person bound down under S. 107, Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-Can be appointed as Lambardar provided there are mitigating circumstances.

Lambardar Lambardar - Appointment - Candidate belonging to minority community and not owning sufficient land to guarantee Government dues-Held, rightly rejected.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Lambardar resigning and only one person submitting application to Collector-Order of appointment of such person as Lambardar not open to appeal.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Non-cultivation of land by candidate on certain occasions would not justify ignoring his claims.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Mere fact that candidate worked for some years as temporary Lambardar does not mean that he has acquired any right to such appointment.

"Female candidate-Appointment is regulated by Punjab Land Revenue Rules, r. 17 (ii) (d)-Female can be appointed when she is sole owner or special reasons for giving her preference exist.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Estate wholly or chiefly owned by Government-Appointment to be governed by r. 17, Punjab Land Revenue Rules.

Lambardar Lambardar - Appointment - Colony estate - Non-resident appointed with direction to take up residence in estate—Order-complied with-No interference in revision.

Lambardar Lambardar-Appointment-Recommendations of Tahsildar, EAC and Union Council-Mere opinions which cannot undermine discretion of Collector.