Ranjit Singh, J.@mdashFather of the petitioner namely Bachu Singh was Lambardar of Village Gehlab Tehsil Hathin District Palwal. A criminal
complaint was registered against him under Sections 420/465/467/468/471 IPC. On the basis of complaint made against father of the petitioner,
he was removed from the post of Lambardar. Applications were then invited for filling up the post of Lambardar. Three candidates namely
Bijender Singh, Danveer and the petitioner submitted their applications. The Collector appointed Bijender Singh - respondent No. 4 to the post of
Lambardar on 27.7.2009 by holding that son of the dismissed Lambardar can not be considered fit for the post of Lambardar. The petitioner filed
an appeal against the same which was also dismissed on 16.02.2010. The revision filed by the petitioner was also dismissed. The petitioner,
accordingly, has approached this Court through the present writ petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the order passed by the Collector and upheld by the various authorities is perverse as it is
based on a consideration which is not relevant for making the appointment.
3. On the other hand the counsel for the respondents would contend that it is not the only ground for which claim of the petitioner was declined. He
submits that otherwise also, respondent No. 4 was found to be more meritorious and his merit being better, the Collector had appointed
respondent No. 4 as Lambardar.
4. It may appear to be so, but it is equally noticeable that the Collector has taken into consideration that the father of the petitioner was removed
from the post of Lambardar and this has certainly weighed with him to ignore the petitioner. This, in my view, was not the relevant consideration
which could be taken while assessing the merits or demerits of respective candidates. The disqualification earned by father of the petitioner on
account of criminal case registered against him can not be a taint on the petitioner. The petitioner has an independent life to live and has his own
right to claim. Accordingly, some irrelevant considerations have percolated in the process of selection to the post of Lambardar and it may have to
be excluded from consideration. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to remand the case to the Collector for fresh
consideration. The Collector shall ignore the aspect of dismissal of father of the petitioner from the post of Lambardar while reassessing the case of
appointment. The Collector, however, would be at liberty to consider the respective merits of the candidates concerned and shall further be at
liberty to appoint respondent No. 4 if he finds him to be more meritorious. The fresh consideration would be confined to candidates who had
earlier been under consideration and no fresh applications is to be invited.