1. WAHEED AKHTAR ANSARI (MEMBER JUDICIAL-III).--- These revision petitions have been filed against order dated 27-8-2012, passed by learned Commissioner, Multan Division, whereby appeals of the present petitioners were dismissed. As facts and law points involved in these cases are interconnected, therefore, these shall be disposed of through this single order.
2. 2.Arguments heard and record perused.
3. 3.Learned counsel for petitioner Khalid Mehmood R.O.R. No.2237 of 2012 argued that admittedly the respondent Abdul Hayee is Lecturer in Government S.E. College, Bahawalpur since long and he is permanently residing in House No.7-D, Officers Colony, Club Road, Bahawalpur. The said house was allotted to him vide order dated 16-1-2010. Consequently, the respondent is absentee and cannot be appointed as Lambardar under the law. It was held by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan through ruling reported as 2013 SCM R 363 that any person who is a government/civil servant is not eligible to be appointed to the post of Lambardar. Duties of headman are to collect the government dues and deposit of the same into the government treasury. The respondent being an absentee was not eligible to be appointed as Lambardar but this very vital aspect of the case was totally ignored by the learned lower courts while passing he impugned orders. Lastly, it was prayed that the revision petition may be accepted.
4. 4.Learned counsel for petitioner Muhammad Siddique of R.O.R. No.2704 of 2012 contended that the petitioner's physique is sound. He is young energetic and owns 56-k, 4-m of land. The said land is sufficient to meet the requirements of Zar-e-Bhat. Conversely, respondent No.3 owns only 41-k, 13- m of land. The petitioner is also son of deceased Lambardar and enjoys good reputation in the locality. The petitioner gained a lot of experience of Lambardari matters while working with his father during his life time. The petitioner has also hereditary claim. The petitioner is influential person than the respondent No.3 (Khalid Mehmood). On the other hand, the respondent No.3 (Khalid Mehmood) has no hereditary claim. While concluding the arguments, it was prayed that the revision petition of respondent No.3 (Khalid Mehmood) may be dismissed and in case of Abdul Haye, the respondent No.1 is not appointed, the petitioner may kindly be appointed as Lambardar.
5. 5.Learned counsel for petitioner Munawar Islam of R.O.R. No.2705 of 2012 almost reiterated and endorsed the contention of the petitioner, Muhammad Siddique of R.O.R. No.2237 of 2012 and prayed that the revision petition of respondent No.3 (Khalid Mehmood) may be dismissed and in case of Abdul Haye, the respondent No.1 is not appointed, the petitioner may kindly be appointed as Lambardar.
6. 6.On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents Abdul Haye etc. contended that the petitioners have not taken any new ground in the instant revision petitions as all the grounds were well-taken. Respondent No.1 is the elder son of the deceased Lambardar, therefore, he has hereditary claim. The respondent obtained more marks than all other contestants. Therefore, he has preferential right and he was rightly and lawfully appointed Lambardar. The respondent is owner of 56-k, 04-m of agricultural land. The respondent belongs to majority community. The respondent is Assistant Professor in the Government S.E. College and he has obtained NOC from the Department for the post of Lambardar. The government servant cannot be debarred from the post of Lambardar as held by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan vide PLD 1999 SC 484. The Government accommodation has been taken by the respondent just for the purpose of education of his son. The respondent is not only residing in the said chak but also has constructed a dera there. The instant revision petitions have been filed against the well-reasoned and justified orders, which were passed after hearing contention of the parties. Finally, it was prayed that all the revision petitions may be dismissed.
7. 7.I have considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties perused record available in the case file including the impugned orders and written arguments submitted by the parties. Brief of the matter is that due to the death of permanent Lambardar of Chak No.366/WB, Tehsil Dunyapur on 10-1-2011, the post of Lambardar fell vacant. In order to appoint successor Lambardar, applications were called and in response thereto, 13 candidates submitted their applications.
8. Learned Assistant Commissioner, Dunyapur recommended the name of Abdul Haye, the present respondent. Learned District Collector, Lodhran appointed Abdul Haye as Lambardar of the said Chak vide order dated 18-1-2012. The operative part of the order is as under:--- "Arguments were heard in detail. The record/file as well as the supporting documents/case-laws presented by the learned counsel for the candidates have also been perused minutely. Mr. Abdul Hai, the eldest son of the deceased Lambardar has been found the best candidate for appointment as permanent Lambardar of the chak as he is well-educated, owns 56 Kanals, 4 Marlas of agricultural land being cultivated by himself. According to certificates issued in his favour by various departments, he is a "Misali Kashtkar". He belongs to the community which is in majority.
9. He has been performing duties as Sarbarah Lambardar since 2003. There has not been found any Government dues outstanding against him. The Tehsil and District Nazims as well as the Revenue hierarchy have awarded him certificates for his efforts made for earthquake affectees in the year 2005. The other departments have also awarded him certificates of honour for his different services. The concerned departments have also issued NOC regarding performance of duties as Lambardar. He has also got civil defence training. There has been found nothing against him by inhabitants of the area/education department or revenue hierarchy. The ID Card, vote list, electricity bills and self cultivation of his owned agricultural land shows that he cannot be considered an absentee from the chak. Moreover, in the light of case-laws/authorities presented by his counsel, the mere fact of his being a civil servant and posted in Bahawalpur does not disqualify him. Nor does it automatically make him an absentee. The fact that he has been satisfactorily performing his duties as Sarbarah Lambardar provides sufficient proof that his job is no hindrance in the performance of his duties as Lambardar.
10. In the light of above, Mr. Abdul Hai son of Abdul Salam is hereby appointed as permanent Lambardar of Chak No.366/WB Tehsil Dunyapur District Lodhran".
11. This order was assailed by the present petitioners through three appeals filed in the court of learned Commissioner, Multan Division, Multan, which were dismissed vide order dated 27-8-2012.
12. The concluding para of the order is reproduced as under:--- "Arguments heard. Record perused. It is evident from the record that the respondent owns land measuring 56-Kanals and 4 Marlas, while Khalid Mehmood appellant is an owner of the land measuring 41-Kanals and 13-Marlas. Further, the qualification of the respondent is M.A., whereas Khalid Mehmood, appellant is B.A. Therefore, the respondent has an edge over the appellant, Khalid Mehmood with regard to the land and the education. The respondent has been performing the duties as Sarbrah Lambardar since 2003 and as permanent Lambardar for the previous seven months. Therefore, he has sufficient experience of Lambardari affairs. He is not a defaulter of Government dues. Nothing exists against him in police record. During the earthquake in 2005, he performed valuable duties along with local revenue authorities. The Deputy District Officer (Revenue), Tehsil Nazim, Dunyapur and District Nazim Lodhran awarded him certificates for his good performance. Other departments have also awarded him certificates for his different services. He has obtained civil defence training and enjoys good reputation in the locality. He always cooperates with Government functionaries in recovery of Government dues. The Tehsildar and Deputy District Officer (Revenue), Dunyapur recommended his name along with other candidates for appointment of permanent Lambardar, while, Additional District Collector, Lodhran recommended only his name for the post of Lambardar. He has secured 100% marks as per notification of Board of Revenue, Punjab. 6-candidates withdrew their claim in his favour, which depicts his influence in the vicinity. There is no bar in appointing a Government Servant as Lambardar of a Chak and the concerned department has issued NOC. Towards the performance of his duties as Lambardar. Furthermore, the respondent has been performing the duties as Sarbrah Lambardar as well as permanent Lambardar since 2003. In view of afore-stated, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order which is upheld and all the three appeals, having no force, are rejected."
13. From the above whole exercise, it appeared that Muhammad Siddique and Munawar Islam petitioners of R.O.Rs. Nos.2704 of 2012, 2705 of 2012 and Abdul Haye, respondent of all the three R.O.Rs. are real brothers and son of deceased Lambardar. The arguments advanced by respective counsel show that in actual, there are two contestants Khalid Mehmood, the petitioner of R.O.R.
14. No.2237 of 2012 and Abdul Haye, the present respondent. The other two petitioners are real brothers of respondent and sort of covering candidates/contestants. Due to the reason, the merits of Khalid Mehmood and Abdul Haye have been discussed in the operative part of order of learned District Collector. It is established and admitted that Abdul Haye, the present respondent is living in Bahawalpur along with his wife (who is also government servant) and children in Bahawalpur in a government residence.
15. 8.The permanent presence of the village headman is required to perform all these duties in a just and appropriate manner. Whereas, the respondent is bound to live for most of his time in Bahawalpur in connection with his government job and to look after the affairs of his family and so could not be able to do justice with the duties to be assigned to him as village headman. Reliance is placed upon 1966 SCMR 1581, which reads as under:--- "A person may well be a permanent resident of a village or a Chak for which a Lambardar is to be appointed but if he is doing his business or some other job elsewhere and also normally resides there, he will be an absentee for the purpose of appointment as Lambardar as he will not be available to perform day to day functions/duties attached to the office of Lambardar. This disqualification, it may be stated, is envisaged in Rule 18(2)(c) of the Land Revenue Rules. The duties of Headman are prescribed in Rule 22 which provides, inter alia that in addition to the duties imposed upon Headman under any other law, a Headman shall--- (i)Collect the land revenue and all sums recoverable as land revenue from the estate in which he holds office, collects rents and other income of the common land; (ii)Report to the Tehsildar all encroachments on roads (including village roads) or on Government's waste lands and injuries to, or appropriation of, Government property situated within the estate; (iii)Report any injury to public buildings in the estate; (iv)Implement, to the best of his ability, any orders that he may be received from the Collector, requiring him to furnish information or to assist in providing, on payment, supplies or means of transport for troops or for officers of Government on duty; (v)Assist, in such manner as the Collector may from time to time direct, at all crop inspections, recording of mutations, surveys, preparation of records of rights or other revenue business within the estate.
16. (vi)Attend the summons of all authorities having jurisdiction in the estate; assist, when so required by them, all officers of the Government in the discharge of their duties; furnish all relevant information in this behalf; (vii)Report to the Patwari any outback of disease among human beings or cattle and the deaths of any right-holders in the estate, or sub-division of the estate, in which he holds office;
(viii) Report any breach or cut in a Government irrigation canal or channel, to the nearest Canal Officer, Zilladar or Canal Patwari; (ix)Under the general or special directions of the Collector, to use his good offices to assist all officers of Government and other persons, duly authorized by the Collector, in the enrolment of military personnel.
17. In the backdrop of the above, the revision petitions are accepted. The impugned order dated 27-8- 2012, passed by learned Commissioner, Multan Division, Multan and order dated 18-1-2012 passed by learned District Collector, Lodhran are set aside and the cases are remanded to learned District Collector, Lodhran, to decide the same afresh, as per law. Arguments were heard on 23-5-2014 and order was reserved which is announced today i.e. 29-5-2014. Parties be informed.