' FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUHAN, J.---The factual resume gleans to this petition is that respondent No,2 filed application for appointment of Lambardar being son of Muhammad Tufail (deceased)
Lambardar. The petitioner on his own behalf and on behalf of 101 villagers requested for his appointment of Lambardar of the village. Ultimately District Revenue Officer, Sialkot appointed respondent No,2 as Lambardar vide order, dated 22-10-2003. The petitioner being aggrieved assailed the said order before the Executive District Officer (Revenue), who vide order, dated 24-7- 2004 accepted the appeal and set aside the order, dated 2-10-2003. Respondent No,2 assailed the said order before the Member Board of Revenue, Punjab, who vide order, dated 29-3-2006 accepted the appeal and set aside the impugned order, hence this petition.
2. Heard.
3. Nothing is available on the record to submit claim of thepetitioner that he had a preferential right of appointment as Lambardar. Respondent found to be the fit young educated person was appointed by the District Revenue Officer, Silakot as Lambardar vide his order, dated 22-10-2003.
This order was set aside by EDO(R) in appeal simply on the ground that he having more experience in age would be more suitable person. But the order was against set aside by Member Board of Revenue and respondent was found to be more fit and suitable person on the basis of his young age, and education. The Revenue authority having the exclusive jurisdiction had reached a conclusion after considering the factual and legal aspect of the case. No one has a vested right to be appointed as Lambardar. It is for the relevant authorities to select persons best suited for purpose with a view to facilitate performance of administrative functions of Lambardar. The competent authorities on Revenue side after considering merits of both sides ultimately selected one for such post. The exclusive jurisdiction so vested with the Revenue authorities cannot be interfered with in exercise of writ jurisdiction by this Court. No legal infirmity or jurisdictional error was pointed out in appointing respondent as a Lambardar. Constitutional petition being devoid of force is hereby dismissed.