( 2026:HHC:20018-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7274/2022 Decided on: 26.05.2026 Mohinder Singh (deceased) through LRs …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. .…Respondent. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Suneet Goel, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vivek Negi, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J. Ejectment proceedings under Section 163 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act, 1954 (the Act, in short) were initiated against the petitioners. The Assistant Collector First Grade, Jubbal, District Shimla, on 11.09.2009, ordered petitioners’ ejectment from the Government land comprised in Khasra Nos. 318 & 326, Kitta-2, measuring 264-18 DM (decimeters), situated in Revenue Sector Nagar Panchayat Jubbal. Petitioners’ appeal against this order was dismissed by the Sub Divisional Collector, Rohru, District Shimla, on 19.12.2011. The revision petition preferred by the petitioners was also 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ( 2026:HHC:20018-DB dismissed on 16.06.2016 by the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla. These orders were not interfered with by the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Himachal Pradesh, who dismissed petitioners’ revision petition on 11.05.2022, giving occasion to the petitioners to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file. 3. Admittedly, ejectment proceedings were initiated against the petitioners under Section 163 of the Act with respect to two khasra numbers, i.e. Khasra Nos. 318 and 326 situated in Nagar Panchayat Jubal, Tehsil Jubal and District Shimla. The area of these two khasra numbers was recorded as 264-18 DM (decimeters), as is apparent from the ejectment order dated 11.09.2009 passed by the Assistant Collector First Grade, Jubal. Petitioners’ defence was that the land comprised in old Khasra No. 5104/2/1, measuring 2 biswas, had been granted to them under Nautor and Mutation No. 238 in this regard was attested on 29.01.1982. The petitioners also claimed possession over Khasra Nos. 319 and 320. 3(i) While ordering petitioners’ ejectment, the Assistant Collector First Grade, Jubal held that the demarcation conducted by the Assistant Collector Second Grade, Jubal had established encroachment by the petitioners over the subject land. The petitioners had insisted before the said authority for demarcating the land on the 3 ( 2026:HHC:20018-DB basis of the old revenue record, however, the Assistant Collector First Grade, Jubal declined to consider the said request. 3(ii) The petitioners preferred an appeal against the aforesaid order on the grounds that: (i) They had been denied adequate opportunity to present their case before the Assistant Collector First Grade, Jubal; (ii) The demarcation had not been carried out in their presence; and (iii) the petitioners had specifically pleaded that they had become owners of the land by way of adverse possession, thereby raising the issue of title, which had not been dealt with in accordance with law by the Assistant Collector First Grade, Jubal. The Sub Divisional Collector, Rohru, District Shimla, vide order dated 19.12.2011, held that ample opportunity had been afforded to the petitioners and that the demarcation established their encroachment over an area measuring 264-18 DM (decimeters). 3(iii) The above orders were affirmed by the Divisional Commissioner on 16.06.2016. Thereafter, the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), while rejecting petitioners’ revision petition on 11.05.2022, gave another reason for deciding against the petitioners. The reason being that even if petitioners’ contention is accepted, it would mean that the land bearing Khasra No. 5104/2/1 measuring 0-2 bighas (2 biswas) had been allotted to the petitioners, whereas the petitioners were found to be in unauthorized possession of 264.18 square meters; The area of 264.18 square meters under 4 ( 2026:HHC:20018-DB unauthorized possession of the petitioners is about four times the area allotted to them in Khasra No. 5104/2/1, i.e. 0-2 bighas (2 biswas); On conversion, 2 biswas would equal to approximately 77 square meters, whereas the petitioners were found in unauthorized possession of 264.18 square meters, i.e. about four times the area allotted to them under Nautor. Inter alia, for this reason, the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), H.P., ordered petitioners’ ejectment while confirming the orders impugned before him. Relevant portion from the order passed by the Financial Commissioner (Appeals) H.P. reads as under: - “7. I have considered the arguments put forth on behalf of parties and have gone through the record of the courts below. The main contentions of the petitioner are that in the year 1981-82, land bearing khasra No.5104/2/1 measuring area 0-2 bigha, was allotted to him as nautor and he has raised construction thereon, but during the present settlement operations, boundaries of khasra numbers have been disturbed due to which the petitioner is found in unauthorized possession over the Government land. Though, this issue has been raised by the petitioner at every stage, but in case the petitioner is aggrieved with the record prepared during the settlement operations, he should have raked up the matter before competent authority. But, the record of the courts below shows that the petitioner has never challenged the entries made in the -record-of-rights prepared during the Settlement operations. However, a copy of mutation No.238 pertaining to Mauza Devra, Tehsil Jubbal, available at page 61-62 of the record of Ld. Collector, shows that land bearing khasra No.5104/2/1 measuring area 0-2 bighas was allotted to the Petitioner in the aforesaid mohal, but the un-authorized possession of the petitioner is found on 264-18 square meters area, which is about four times to the 5 ( 2026:HHC:20018-DB area allotted to hun i.e. 0-2 bighas, which on conversion to metric system, comes approximately equal to 77 square meters. So far as issue qua demarcation of land is concerned, as has also been rightly observed by the courts below, the Naib Tehsildar concerned has demarcated the land personally, wherein the encroachment of the petitioner has been Confirmed. Thus, the AC 1 Grade, has rightly proceeded against the petitioner under Section 163 of the Act and has ordered his eviction from the government land in dispute, being in unauthorized possession thereon. Further, the appellate as well as the revisional authorities below have passed well reasoned orders against the petitioner, which require no interference by invoking revisional jurisdiction.” 4. Since all the authorities below, right from the Assistant Collector First Grade to the Sub Divisional Collector and up to the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, had mentioned the area encroached upon by the petitioner in Khasra Nos. 318 & 326 as 264- 18 decimeters, which would be equal to roughly about 2.64 square meters or, in other words even less than 1 biswa, and it was only in the order passed by the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Shimla on 11.05.2022 that the measurement of the encroached area was mentioned as 265.18 square meters, the following order was passed in the matter on 06.05.2026:- “The order passed by Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Jubbal, Distt. Shimla, H.P. refers to be encroachment allegedly made by the petitioner as 264-18 DM. However, in the order passed by the Financial Commissioner, the encroached area is reflected as 264- 18 Sq. meters. Let learned Additional Advocate General to clarify the above aspect. List on 25.05.2026.” 6 ( 2026:HHC:20018-DB Pursuant to above, learned Additional Advocate General placed on record office instructions dated 22.05.2026 from the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Shimla. The said office instructions are to the effect that the land in question measures 26418 square decimeters, i.e. equivalent to 264.18 square meters, corresponding to a total area of 7 biswas. All throughout, the petitioner is said to have encroached upon 264.18 decimeters, that too on the basis of demarcation conducted by the competent officials. It was for the first time before the Financial Commissioner (Appeals) that the measuring unit became square meters and area as 264.18 sq. meters, and on that basis the Financial Commissioner (Appeals) held that the area encroached upon by the petitioners was four times the area allotted to them under Nautor Scheme. There is discrepancy in the dimensions, measuring unit as also regarding the area allegedly encroached upon by the petitioners. If it is held that the petitioners had encroached upon an area of 264.18 decimeters as had been the case set up against them before the three Revenue Courts, petitioners’ encroachment in that case would come out to be around less than 1 biswa, which is to be considered in view of their projected case of having been allotted 2 biswas of land under Nautor. The discrepancy in the measurement of the encroachment area assumes 7 ( 2026:HHC:20018-DB significance in view of the reason assigned by the Financial Commissioner (Appeals) for dismissing the revision petition in the impugned order, i.e. that the petitioners had encroached upon four times the area allotted to them under Nautor. These are factual aspects which are required to be considered afresh, in accordance with law. Therefore, for the foregoing reasons, the impugned order dated 11.05.2022 passed by the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), H.P., is set aside. The said authority is directed to consider and decide the matter afresh, in accordance with law, keeping in view the observations made hereinabove. Parties, through their learned counsel, are directed to appear before the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), H.P., at Shimla on 06.07.2026. The instant petition to stand disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 26th May, 2026(rohit)