The RSA was the appropriate forum, for determining the factum, of, legality or illegality of assumption of possession, upon, writ khasra numbers, and for determining whether during pendency thereof either status quo was to be maintained or whether possession subject, to, payment of mesne profit, was to be delivered. This remarkable judgement was passed by Shimla High Court in the case of Jagdish Ram & Ors. V. State of H.P. & Ors [LPA No. 135 of 2015] by The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur and The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma
The Mandamus writ petition was filed directing respondents No.1 to 3 to complete the consolidation proceedings within a time bound period not exceeding 6 months, put the petitioner in possession of his holdings prior to the consolidation proceedings and directing the respondents to pay to the petitioner compensation for the deprivation of his property for the period he remained out of possession. The writ petitioner herein was unlawfully deprived of possession of the writ property during consolidation proceedings his possession, upon, the writ property, became reduced from hitherto 42.3 kanals to 23.16 kanals, and, also his concomitant physical possession, upon, the writ property became reduced. Furthermore, there was also a reference in the impugned verdict to a judgment pronounced by the Civil Court qua land measuring 42.6 kanals, and, the finalization of the freshly instituted consolidation proceedings, the writ petitioner be put in physical possession of the writ property. The correspondents, asserted that they did rather acquire title to the suit property through adverse possession.
The court was in the opinioned that, “the judgment, rendered by the Civil Court, and, though purportedly appertaining to the writ khasra numbers or the suit khasra numbers, alluded in the verdict of the learned Single Judge, hence symbolic and physical possession, of the writ khasra numbers, or suit khasra numbers, stood delivered, to the writ petitioner arrayed as co-respondent No.4 in the LPA, (i) thereupon, up till a decision dispute becomes encapsulated, with respect to suit khasra numbers or the writ khasra numbers, (ii) appertains to the validity of acquisition, of, title thereon, respectively by the appellants, and/or by the writ petitioner, arrayed as co-respondent No.4, in the extant LPA”
The court was of the view that, “In summa, the impugned verdict is recalled. Also since unclouded, and, uncontested title, upon, the apposite khasra numbers, is, the indispensable norm for hence thereon , consolidation proceedings becoming validly recourse, thereupon, hence, till a final and conclusive adjudication, is, made upon RSA No. 365 of 2015, thereupon the respondents concerned, may not subject, the writ khasra numbers, and, suit khasra numbers to consolidation operations.”
The writ petition disposed of in the afore terms that, “High Court was seized, of, the RSA, and, also becomes the appropriate forum, for determining the factum, of, legality or illegality of assumption of possession, upon, writ khasra numbers, and, also it becomes, the, appropriate forum, for, determining whether during pendency thereof either status quo is to be maintained or whether possession subject, to, payment of mesne profit, is, to be delivered, to, either of the contesting litigants, thereupon, even the afore res-controversial is left, open, to decided by the High Court, hence seized with the afore RSA.”
