Pramod Sood vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

Deepak Gupta, J.

1 The applicant by means of this application prays that he may be permitted to file objections to the demarcation report submitted by the Settlement Officer or in the alternative fresh Commissioner be appointed to demarcate the land and the earlier order of this Court dated 8.9.2010 be modified to this extent.

2 The undisputed facts are that the applicant was granted some land by the Union of India to run a Coal Company some time in the year 1946. It appears that in between some portion of the land belonging to the Railways including a portion of the land leased out to the applicant was acquired by the H.P.P.W.D. for the purpose of widening of the circular road in Shimla.

It is not disputed that the applicant has been ordered to be evicted from the land which is owned by the Respondent Railways and this order of eviction is not under Challenge. The only dispute is with regard to the identity of the land owned by the Railways from which the applicant has to be evicted.

The eviction order passed against the applicant under Public Premises Act was upheld at all levels. Even the petition filed by the applicant in this Court was dismissed. Thereafter, the applicant/Plaintiff filed a suit praying that the Union of India and Railway Authorities be restrained from interfering in the possession of the Plaintiff/applicant. The case of the Plaintiff/applicant was that the total land initially in his possession was 364.73 sq. meters and out of this land 188.21 sq. meters was acquired by the HPPWD and owned by the State of Himachal Pradesh and balance of land measuring 176.52 sq. meters only is to be handed over to the Railways. Alongwith the suit, an application for stay was filed, which was rejected by the Trial Court as well as by the learned Addl. District Judge. Thereafter the applicant approached this Court and this Court directed that the land be demarcated. Even before this Court, it was not disputed that 364.73 sq. meters was the land originally allotted to the Petitioner. Out of this 188.21 sq. meters was acquired by HPPWD and only 176.52 sq. meters of land was owned by the Railways. The identity of the land was in dispute. The Petitioner along with his petition had filed a map, mared C-1. The operative portion of the order of this Court read as follow:

The settlement Officer, Shimla is appointed as Commissioner in this case to do the needful. The Registrar General of this Court is directed to send a copy of this Order alongwith a copy of the plan Ext.C-1 within one week from today to the commissioner. The commissioner, within a week of the receipt of the aforesaid communication from the Registrar General, shall issue notices to the Petitioner as well as his counsel Shri Neeraj Gupta, Advocate and Respondent No. 3 and Shri J.L. Kashyap, Advocate and shall visit the spot to demarcate the land within 15 days after issuing the notices.

The settlement Officer on the basis of the revenue record including the record relating to the acquisition of the Railway land for the purpose of widening of the National Highway, and may also take assistance of the map Ex. C-1 which is not disputed by the parties, shall demarcate the land belonging to the Railways. He shall ensure that 176.52 sq. meters of land is handed over to the Railways. A sum of Rs. 10,000/- shall be borne equally by both the parties.

Need less to say that till the commissioner gives his report the Respondents shall not forcibly evict the Petitioner. The parties also agree that the suit shall be withdrawn after the report of the Commissioner is received.

With the aforesaid directions, the petition is disposed of. No. costs.

The Settlement Officer carried out the demarcation and came to the conclusion that the entire land in possession of the Petitioner belongs to the railways and, therefore, he has to be evicted from this land. In the order it was clearly stated that No. objections to the report of Local Commissioner would be entertained. This order is sought to be recalled mainly on the ground that the Settlement Officer has not carried out the demarcation in accordance with the plan Ex.C-1. Here I would like to mention that Ex. C-1 is not a tatima or a detailed map to scale. It is more in the nature of a plan showing the location of various properties. The correctness of this plan was not denied but the plan cannot be said to be a plan on the basis of which demarcation could be conducted. In fact this Court had specifically directed the Settlement Officer to carry out the demarcation on the basis of revenue records including the record relating to the acquisition of the Railway''s land. He was only required to take the assistance of the map Ex.C-1 which was not disputed by the parties. But, Ex.C-1 could not replace the revenue record.

To satisfy my own conscience, I have gone through the demarcation report of the Settlement Officer. This clearly shows that the Settlement Officer first established three pacca points about which there is No. dispute. He also identified the old cart road and thereafter identified the new cart road which would show that what amount of land was utilized by the HPPWD in expansion of the National Highway. After carrying out the entire exercise he came to the conclusion that the entire offices, structures and open land possessed by the Petitioner is measuring 176.52 sq. meters only and this entire land is owned by the Railways. There is No. reason to set aside this report and, therefore, the application is dismissed.

It is apparent that the applicant/Petitioner who has been in illegal possession for many years, is just trying to delay the proceedings on one pretext or the other. The application is, therefore, rejected with exemplary costs of Rs. 20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only). The parties are also directed to pay the Commissioner''s fee as earlier directed to the Commissioner within one week from today. It has been urged before me that the Petitioner has some material on spot which has to be removed and some reasonable time may be given to him. The Petitioner is given time upto 31st October, 2011 to vacate subject to the condition that he shall pay to the Railways an amount of Rs. 15,000/- per month for the months August, September and October i.e. Rs. 45,000/- on or before 31st August, 2011. In case, he fails to pay this amount, he shall not be entitled to retain the possession of the premises. In case, he does not vacate and does not pay the amount, the Respondents/Union of India shall not only be entitled to take possession of the property but shall also be entitled to recover an amount of Rs. 1,000/- per day as use and occupation charges from the applicant/Petitioner since he is occupying valuable property in the heart of the town without any legal rights. The application is disposed of in the aforesaid terMs.