MUHAMMAD RAMZAN vs MEMBER (REVENUE) BOARD OF REVENUE and others
This petition for leave to appeal was directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court (Multan Bench), which dismissed the petitioner's constitutional writ petition. The matter originated from the selection and appointment of a Lambardar, where the Collector appointed the respondent, the Commissioner reversed it on appeal in favor of the petitioner, and the Member, Board of Revenue restored the Collector's order on revision. The High Court dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the selection between eligible candidates falls within the discretion of the competent authority and does not constitute an act without lawful authority. The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's reasoning, holding that choosing a better candidate rests on the administrative discretion of the competent authority, which cannot be interfered with in writ jurisdiction unless shown to be without lawful authority. Consequently, leave to appeal was refused and the petition was dismissed.
- Whether the selection and appointment of a Lambardar between eligible candidates falls within the discretion of the competent authority?
- Can the High Court interfere in writ jurisdiction with administrative discretion exercised by revenue authorities in selecting a Lambardar?
ORDER
1. ' JAVID IQBAL, J.--This petition for leave is directed against judgment of the Lahore High Court Multan Bench dated 30th March, 1983 whereby writ petition of the petitioner was dismissed.
2. ' Briefly the facts are that the Collector appointed Haji Bahadur as Lambardar in a vacancy. On appeal the Commissioner appointed the present petitioner as Lambardar. In revision the Member Board of Revenue set aside the order of the Commissioner and upheld the order of Collector, whereupon the petitioner challenged it by way of writ petition which was dismissed as stated above on the ground that it was essentially a matter of selection and the selection of one over the other when both were eligible by competent authority cannot be considered an act without lawful authority. We do not find any flaw with this ' conclusion as the selection of a better candidate depends on the discretion of the competent authority. The petition is therefore dismissed.
3. ' Leave to .