Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

“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