High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Bakha Singh Alias Gurbax Singh vs State Of Haryana And Others on 29 July, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bakha Singh Alias Gurbax Singh vs State Of Haryana And Others on 29 July, 2009
Letters Parent Appeal No.676 of 2009(O&M)                            1


      IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
                 HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.


                                              L.P.A.No.676 of 2009 (O&M)
                                              Date of Decision:29.7.2009


Bakha Singh alias Gurbax Singh                           ....Appellant

                                            Versus

State of Haryana and others                              ....Respondents



CORAM:        HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR
              HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH


Present:     Mr.K.S.Dhaliwal, Advocate for the appellant.



1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
   judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reports or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported to the Digest?



M.M.KUMAR, J.

This is an appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters

Patent challenging order dated 6.7.2009 passed by the learned

single Judge of this Court in CWP No.9677 of 2008 titled Bakha

Singh alias Gurbax Singh Versus State of Haryana and others.

The matter pertains to the appointment of office of Lambardar and

the learned single Judge did not find any fault with order dated

26.5.2009 (Annexure P3) passed by the Financial Commissioner,

Haryana (respondent No.1), who had remanded the case to the

Collector. The order of Financial Commissioner shows that numerous
Letters Parent Appeal No.676 of 2009(O&M) 2

facts were highlighted before him, which were not considered by the

Collector. The aforesaid facts and circumstances crucial to the

decision, for example acquittal of Dharam Pal-respondent No.4 in

various criminal cases were required to be taken into account and

were required to be determined whether it would still entail a stigma

on the basis of material on record.

Having heard the learned counsel, we are of the view that

the course adopted by the learned single Judge up-holding the order

dated 26.5.2009 (Annexure P3) passed by the Financial

Commissioner relegating the parties to the Collector for consideration

of various facts does not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting

interference of this Court. There is, thus, no merit in this appeal.

Dismissed.




                                                      (M.M.Kumar)
                                                          Judge



29.7.2009                                             (Jaswant Singh)
AS                                                          Judge