MUJAHID MUSTAQEEM AHMED, J.--- By filing the instant writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the legality and propriety of the order dated 15.12.2009, passed by learned Member Judicial-III, Board of Revenue, Punjab Lahore.
2. The pithy facts for fair adjudication of the instant writ petition are that on death of Muhammad Arshad, permanent Lambardar of Chak No. 366/WP, Tehsil Dunyapur, after due process, his son Muzaffar Ahmad Akhtar-respondent No.4 (respondent) was appointed Lambardar, whereas the claim of present petitioner was declined vide order dated 25.04.2009, passed by District Officer (Revenue)/District Collector, Lodhran. The petitioner assailed this order by filing appeal before Executive District Officer (Revenue), Lodhran, who vide order dated 20.08.2009, allowed the appeal and appointed the petitioner as permanent Lambardar of the aforesaid village. Subsequent thereto, respondent moved a petition under Section 164 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967. Vide impugned order, the revision petition was allowed and the order dated 20.08.2009 passed by Executive District Officer (Revenue), Lodhran was set aside by the Member Board of Revenue while observing as under:- "The petitioner Muzaffar Ahmad Akhtar, though belonging to a minority community, is most suitable for appointment as Lambardar instead of respondent. He has vast experience for 16 years and is also son of deceased Lambardar which is a priority for this post. Furthermore, the record of petitioner is unblemished and there are no complaints about any negligence during his working as Sarbrah Lambardar. Therefore, accept the revision petition and dismiss the impugned order dated 20.08.2009 passed by the EDO (R), Lodhran."
3. The petitioner has assailed the order passed by learned Member Judicial-III, Board of Revenue, Punjab Lahore, mainly on the grounds that the same is against facts, law and in violation of Rule 17 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968. It has been vehemently maintained that the petitioner is highly educated, owns land more than respondent in the Mouza and as such he is best person to be appointed as Lambardar. Whereas respondent has supported the impugned order maintaining that the same has been passed after hearing both the parties, on the basis of ground realities and as such interference by this Court is not warranted.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. Before examining the legality of impugned order, I deem it appropriate to refer qualifications, attributes and accoutrements of Lambardar of a village, in the light of West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968 and update case law as under:- i. He/She shall be literate and the higher qualification of the candidate should be a plus point and clear competitive advantage. ii. He/She shall be a person of impeccable moral and financial integrity. iii. He/She shall not be a convict in any case from any Court of competent jurisdiction in Pakistan or abroad. iv. He/She has not committed or engaged or had been engaged in the past in smuggling, theft, robbery, dacoity or any other crime or involved in anti-social activities reported to the Police; tantamounting to disturb the repose of society. v. He/She shall own the property in the revenue estate and shall be permanent resident of the Village. Due weight should be given to the extent of land holding by the candidate when compared to other candidates from the village revenue estate. vi. He/She shall enjoy good reputation and shall have established eminence and erudition as a responsible member of the society. vii. He/She should have positive mental wiring and tapestries of mind have positive attitude towards the general public and landowners. viii.His/Her contribution towards the welfare of the community must be weighed in quantifiable and verifiable terms, judged from independent sources by the District Collector. ix. He/She must enjoy the privilege of commanding respect and trust in his/her person as a member of the community in a revenue estate. x. He/She should have the right potential to prefer evidence based on truth and assist the district administration while operating against anti-social and anti-state elements. xi. He/She should be neutral and a non-political person.
Record reveals that District Officer (Revenue)/District Collector. Lodhran has appointed the respondent as permanent Lambardar taking into consideration the fact that he has performed duties as "Sarbrah Lambardar" for a long period in accordance with law and was not defaulter in payment of land revenue and owned 32 Kanal 9 Marla land A in the village, whereas petitioner having no experience in the filed is not suitable. The learned Member Board of Revenue has passed the order after affording full opportunity of hearing to the learned counsel for the parties, as noticed supra, after considering merits and demerits of both the candidates for the post of `Lambardar'. The facts of this case are identical to reported case `Bashir Ahmad v. Member (Judicial-III), Board of Revenue Punjab, Lahore and others' (2002 SCM R 1371). In this case law candidate who has performed work as Temporary Lambardar for 14 years was given preference over other candidate, who lacked any experience as Lambardar.
6. The main thrust of the petitioner that he is more educated than respondent and as such better candidate for the post of Lambardar is misconceived one, as Rule 17 of West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968 is silent on the subject. In case law 'Muhammad Rafique v. Nazir Ahmed and others (2007 SCM R 287) it has been laid down that under Rule 19 of West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968, appointment of successor Lambardar on ground of his proximity of relationship with late Lambardar would be valid when there is nothing to indicate any reason which could have disqualified the successor Lamberdar to appointment as successor Lambardar and that under Rule 19 of West Pakistan Land C Revenue Rules, 1968 power of appointment of Lambardar is vested in hierarchy of the revenue officers created under Land Revenue Act, 1967 as revenue officers are better qualified to make choice as against a Court of general jurisdiction regarding appointment of Lambardar. In case 'Muhammad Saleem v. Member (Judicial-V), Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and others (2007 M LD 349) it has been held that under Rules 17 and 19 of the Land Revenue Rules, 1968, hereditary claim of son to appointment as permanent Lambardar in vacancy caused by death of his father has not been washed away and it cannot be ignored as it is still part of statutory rules. In case 'Muhammad Jameel v. Member (Judicial-1), Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore etc.'
(2004 YLR 440) while enumerating the policy it has been held that under Rule 17, appointment of Lambardar made by a Collector should not be ordinarily interfered with unless there is very serious irregularity, injustice or perverseness in Collector's order. In case-law 'Haji Noorwar Jan v. Senior Member, Board of Revenue, N.W.F.P. Peshawar and 4 others' (PLD 1991 Supreme Court 531) it was held that "any error on the part of Board of Revenue in understanding the law, in applying it or in laying down the law can and must be corrected in the Constitutional jurisdiction, for if it is left uncorrected, it will result in subverting the rule of law". But in the case in hand learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out any error of law, committed by respondent No.1 (Member Board of Revenue Punjab) while passing the impugned order, warranting interference by this Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction.
7. Mere fact that respondent is member of minority community not a disqualification under the West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968 because Lambardar is not required to perform any religious duties. He has to perform mainly following duties:-
1. To collect Government Dues declared as arrears of Land Revenue by the District Collector.
2. To collect the rents and other income of the common land.
3. Acknowledge every payment received by him in the books of landowners and tenants.
4. Report to the Tehsildar the death of any assignee of land revenue or Government Pensioner.
Moreover, respondent's father has also successfully performed his job as permanent Lambardar and the Respondent in his life time performed duties of "Sarbrah Lambardar" and the residents of village have not objected to it. The Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 enshrines that there shall be no discrimination between citizens of the State mere on account of religion. Under Articles 4, 25, 27 and 36 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, all the citizens are equal before law and cannot be discriminated on the basis of religion, sex. The latter Article, particularly guarantees and safeguards the legitimate rights and interests of minorities, in eluding their due representation in the Federal and Provincial services.
8. In sequal to above discussion, I find that the impugned order has been passed in accordance with law, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out any illegality, violation of rules or perversity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction and as such instant writ petition being devoid of merits is dismissed.