Inadequate Explanation Under Section 313 CrPC Cannot Be Foundation For Conviction If Prosecution Fails To Prove Case: Allahabad High Court No-Confidence Motion In Housing Societies Fails If 2/3 Majority Not Met; Fractions In Voting Threshold Cannot Be Rounded Down: Bombay High Court Successor Rent Controller Cannot Re-Appreciate Evidence Or Act As Appellate Court Under Review Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court Restores Eviction Order Article 21 Overrides PMLA Section 45 Rigors In Cases Of Unduly Long Incarceration Without Trial: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail To SSC Scam ‘Middleman’ Unregistered Family Partition Deed Recording Past Oral Arrangement Doesn't Require Compulsory Registration: Gujarat High Court Private Banks Acting As Authorised Dealers Under FEMA Amenable To Writ Jurisdiction; Can Refuse Transactions For 'Sanctions-Related' Concerns: Gauhati High Court Non-Examination Of Investigating Officer Not Fatal To Prosecution Case If Eyewitness Testimony Is Credible & Trustworthy: Jharkhand High Court Mere Denial Of Signature Insufficient When Execution Is Proved Through Endorsements: Karnataka High Court Restores Specific Performance Decree Sectarianism Claims Can't Discredit Reliable Testimony Of Child Sexual Abuse Victim: Kerala High Court Upholds Madrassa Teacher's Conviction State Must Prove Specific 'Public Interest' To Exempt Projects From Social Impact Assessment Under Section 10A Land Acquisition Act: Telangana High Court Or 2 Rule 2 CPC |Failure To Seek Specific Performance In Earlier Injunction Suit Bars Subsequent Claim; Readiness & Willingness Must Be Continuous: Madras High Court Exoneration In Departmental Proceedings Does Not Result In Automatic Discharge In Criminal Case: Orissa High Court History Sheet Can Be Opened On 'Reasonable Belief' Even Without Conviction, But Must Be Reviewed After 7 Years Of Good Conduct: Rajasthan High Court

“Prerogative of District Collector in Nambardar Appointments Must Not Be Disturbed,” Asserts Punjab and Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent decision by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the appointment of Harmesh Lal as the Nambardar of village Raipur, Tehsil Balachaur, has been upheld. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj, in the case of Pritam Singh vs. State of Punjab & others (CWP-11505 of 2017), emphasized the significance of the District Collector’s discretion in such appointments. The judgment dated 28.07.2023 underscored, “It is the prerogative of the District Collector. Such an appointment should not be disturbed unless a gross irregularity or error is established.”

The petitioner, Pritam Singh, approached the court, challenging the appointment of respondent Harmesh Lal. Singh contended that Lal did not meet the land ownership criterion by the specified cut-off date and presented himself as a more fitting candidate due to his age, educational background, and past service in the Punjab Police.

However, the Court, referencing the case *Sukhjinder Pal Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others*, pointed out that “the appointment of Lambardar is primarily the prerogative and administrative act of the District Collector.” The court further added, referencing *Mahavir Singh vs. Khiali Ram and others*, that age is a significant factor in such appointments.

The bench, after detailed scrutiny, dismissed the petition, thereby affirming the appointment of Harmesh Lal as Nambardar. The judgment underscored that while land ownership remains an important consideration, it cannot be the sole basis for rejection or selection, especially if the Collector deems a candidate otherwise suitable.

Decided on: 28.07.2023

Pritam Singh vs State of Punjab and others 

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Document-1-36.pdf"]

Latest Legal News