JUDGMENT To fill up the vacant po'st of Lamberdar of Chak No.297/JB, Tehsil Gojra, District Toba Tek Singh, on termination of Abdul Hameed, Lumberdar, applications were invited for the appointment of Lamberdar in the Patti of Chak No.297/JB. 10 applications were received in all. Report recommending the petitioner and respondent No.1 was submitted on 4-11-2002, respondent No.5 appointed respondent No.1 as Lamberdar. The petitioner challenged the above order before respondent No.4, which was accepted on 27-3-2003 and the petitioner was appointed as Lamberdar. Respondent No.1 challenged ' earlier order dated 27-3-2003 before respondent No.3, who accepted his appeal by order dated 1-9-2003. The petitioner aggrieved of the order dated 1- 9-2003 of the Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore, has filed this Constitutional petition.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is 47 years old and educated upto middle level. His holding in the Patti is 105 Kanals, 18 Marlas.
Respondent No.1, on the contrary, is 80 years old, educated upto middle level with holding of 5 Kanals, 11 Marlas. Respondent No.1 was involved in a criminal case. He is running business of commission agent and could not look after affairs efficiently.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent No.1 supported by the learned A.A.-G. Appearing on behalf of the respondents Nos.3 to 5 argued that respondent No.1 was acquitted of the charge of murder. It was added that he served Pakistan Army and is a disciplined person. He has personal influence and credibility. According to them, he is though 73 years of age but enjoy sound health;
4. I have carefully considered the respective contentions of the learned counsel for the parties, perused the judgments.
5. The petitionef owns 105 Kanals of land in the Patti while respondent No.1 owns 5 Kanals of land only in the Patti and 92 Kanals, 14 Marlas outside the Patti. As such, respondent No.1 owns only 5 Kanals of land in the Patti for which appointment is being made.
6. The petitioner is 47 years old. He is educated upto middle level and owns 105 Kanals and 18 Marlas of land. He, too, belonged to Rajput majority community and bears good moral character.
7. Rule 17 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968 provides that in the matter of first appointment of headman regard shall he given among other matters to:--
(a) the hereditary claims of the candidate;
(b) extent of property in, the estate, if there are no sub-division of the estate, and in case there be sub-divisions of the estate the extent of the property in the subdivision for which appointment is to be made, possessed by the candidate;
(c) service rendered to the Government by him or by his family;
(d) his personal influence, character, ability and freedom froni indebtedness;
(e) the strength and importance of the community from which selection for a headman is to be made;
(f) his ability to undergo training in Civil Defence in the case of headman in Tehsils situated along the Border.
8. Examining comparative merits and qualification of the petitioner and respondent No. 1, it appears that the petitioner has better claim for appointment, for the following reasons:--
(1) The petitioner is only 47 years of age while respondent. No.1 is stated by the functionaries below, to be 80 years of age. (His identity card attached with the written statement reflects his age as 73 years). The petitioner owns 105 Kanals of land in the Patti for which appointment is being made.
Respondent No.1 only owns 5 Kanals and 11 Marlas of land in the Patti.
(2) Respondent. No,1 is running a business of commission agent at Gojra and remains away from estate. The petitioner has no previous record or history. He was not involved in any criminal case while respondent No.1 remained an accused in a murder case and was later on acquitted.
9. The petitioner having owned a big piece of land in the Patti for which Lamberdar was to be appointed, can be taken as a measure of candidate influence in cases falling under rule 17 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968. The petitioner has comparatively better merit than respondent No.
1. Respondent No.1, being an old man remained Sarbarah Lamberdar for a long period of time and has played his innings. It is the time of new generation. They be provided ati opportunity to prove their worth. The petitioner being younger in age, than respondent No. I, will undertake work and discharge the duty and responsibility as Lamberdar in a more befitting manner.
10. The order of the Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore, cannot be upheld as the same is not in accord with the provisions of rule 17 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968. The consideration amongst others is the land owned in a Patti. Respondent No.1 only owned small portion of land. He may not have influence on the land holders in Patti. This post cannot be filled in by an outsider. On the same reasoning, a person with a small holding may not be able to deliver goods and carry influence.
11. In view of the above discussion, the order of the Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore, dated 1-9-2003 is not sustainable. The same is, therefore. Set aside. The order passed by the Executive District Officer (Revenue) datedIA 27-3-2003 is restored. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.