Himachal Pradesh High Court
Pritam Singh vs State Of H.P. & Another on 17 September, 2024
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
( 2024:HHC:8911 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 200 of 2018
.
Date of decision: 17th Sept., 2024
Pritam Singh ...Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P. & Another. ...Respondents.
Corum
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin C. Negi, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes
For the Petitioner : Mr. Desh Raj Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with
Mr.Varun Chandel, Additional Advocate
General.
Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral)
Petitioner, in present case, has assailed order dated
09.10.2017, passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla Division,
Shimla in case No. 42 of 2017, titled as Pritam Singh vs. State of HP,
whereby his eviction from the Government/Forest land comprising RF
Samaon Kanon C-2, measuring 20-1-0 bighas situated at Samaon Kanon,
Tehsil Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, as directed vide order dated
28.10.2016, passed in Case No. GNR-24/2013 by Collector-cum-Divisional
Forest Officer, Paonta Sahib, Forest Division, Paonta Sahib, District
Sirmaur, H.P., has been affirmed.
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes
( 2024:HHC:8911 )
2 For initiating the proceedings under H.P. Public Premises and
.
Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1971, (in short 'PP Act'), show
cause notice was issued to petitioner under Section 4(1) of PP Act. Before
the Collector, petitioner had denied his unauthorized occupation of forest
land with further submissions that for involvement of serious question of law
and facts in the complaint, matter was required to be determined by the
Civil Court as the possession of petitioner was visible, open, continuous,
peaceful and hostile to the knowledge of Forest Department and all other
concerned since the last more than 30 years. It was also contended that
eviction proceedings were time barred, without any valid and legal cause of
action and in violation of principles of natural justice.
3 Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that petitioner is
claiming title on land concerned on the basis of adverse possession.
4 Petitioner had also made statement before the Forest Block
Officer concerned, which had been reproduced in the order passed by the
Divisional Commissioner, wherein petitioner had expressed his satisfaction
to the demarcation by stating that since last more than 35 years, he was in
possession of land and he had developed fields, constructed permanent
house and cowshed on the land and has also sown the crop of wheat. He
had also admitted his signatures on the damage report register and had
also stated that whatever decision shall be taken by the Government, would
be acceptable to him.
( 2024:HHC:8911 )
5 Denial of unauthorized possession of land is contradicted by
.
the claim of petitioner for claim of acquiring title by way of adverse
possession. So far as claim on the basis of adverse possession is
concerned, in view of statement made before the Forest Block Officer, it is
apparent that petitioner was admitting that State was owner of land in
reference.
6 Even otherwise for defending the title on the basis of adverse
possession, appropriate proceedings have not been initiated by the
petitioner at any point of time. Such claim of petitioner was not
adjudicateable under the summary proceedings under PP Act and
therefore, it was incumbent upon the petitioner, if he was claiming title on
the basis of adverse possession, to take appropriate steps to establish the
same by approaching the competent Court having the jurisdiction to
adjudicate the said claim/issue.
7. Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that statement
recorded by Block Forest Officer has no sanctity as it was never put to the
petitioner as evidence during pendency of case under PP Act.
8 Be that as it may, even if above referred statement is ignored
then also petitioner has failed to take appropriate steps to establish his
claim as well as title on the basis of adverse possession by approaching
appropriate Forum. Therefore, on discarding the aforesaid statement, for
( 2024:HHC:8911 )
material on record, entitlement of petitioners or their predecessor-in-interest
.
for title and possession is not established on record.
9 It is also noticeable that during pendency of present petition,
petitioner had filed affidavit dated 9th March, 2018 admitting therein his
possession over the Government/Forest land with undertaking to surrender
the encroached area if he was found in possession of more than 5 bighas
of such land. This affidavit is anti-thesis to the plea of adverse possession
taken by petitioner during the proceedings under PP Act.
10 As observed by this Court in its order dated 17.7.2024,
passed in CWP No. 1028 of 2002 and connected petitions including present
petition, adjudication of CWP No. 1028 of 2002 regarding validity of Section
163(A) of the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1953 and Himachal
Pradesh Regulation and Encroachment (in certain cases) of Government
Land and Disposal of Government Land Rules, 2002, shall have no impact
in the present matter, because in the absence of approval of the Central
Government or for want of pendency of any request for such approval of
the Central Government, the forest land cannot be put to a use, which is a
non-forest purpose, as also has been defined and explained in Section 2 of
Forest Conservation Act, 1980, clarifying that breaking up or clearing of any
forest land or portion thereof for the cultivation of tea, coffee, spices, rubber,
palms, oil bearing plants, horticulture crops or medical plants and even any
( 2024:HHC:8911 )
purpose other than reafforestation, shall amount to using such land for non-
.
forest purpose.
11. After going through the record, impugned order and
averments made in the petition and also considering the submissions made
by learned counsel for the petitioners, we do not find any merit in the
petition and accordingly the same is dismissed.
12. Consequentially, concerned Revenue Officers, including
Tehsildar concerned and Forest Authorities, including DFO concerned, are
directed to identify the Government/forest land encroached by the
petitioners properly and take possession of the encroached
Government/forest land by fixing permanent boundary marks of the
Government land on or before 11th November, 2024 and compliance
affidavit with respect to taking of possession on the spot, be filed by the
concerned Divisional Forest Officer on or before 18th November, 2024.
13. The concerned authorities are also directed to remove other
encroachment(s) from the Government/Forest land detected/found on the
spot during demarcation/identification of the land in reference by taking
appropriate action in accordance with law in time bound manner, to the
maximum within six months from the date on which such encroachment is
found/detected.
14. Improvements/structures, if any, made on the encroached land
shall vest in the State of Himachal Pradesh/Department and shall be
( 2024:HHC:8911 )
utilized by the State/Department for its use. In case petitioner/encroacher
.
intends to take away the fixtures/building material/debris for his own use, he
may opt for that in writing, but in that eventuality he shall take away the
material of the structure before 10th January 2025 at his own cost.
15. It is made clear that in case petitioner/encroacher opts to take
away the fixtures/building material/debris for his own use, apart from
movable articles, it will not give him right to continue with the possession of
the encroached land and/or structure/building raised on the said land. On
exercising such option, petitioner/encroacher has to remove entire material,
including debris, to hand over the vacant possession of the land and,
thereafter, he shall have to obtain No Objection/Clearance Certificate about
complete removal of everything from the spot whereupon illegal structure
had been raised.
16. In case, he removes fixtures/material only leaving behind the
debris/remains of the building on the spot, in the Government land, the
same shall be removed by the Department but on the expenses of the
petitioner/encroacher and on failure to pay such costs/expenditure, the
same shall be recovered from the petitioner/encroacher/successor-in-
interest as arrears of land revenue.
17. Aforesaid extended time is applicable to immovable property,
but not to movable articles. However, in special circumstances movable
( 2024:HHC:8911 )
articles may be taken within reasonable time, say 5 to 7 days, after initial
.
last date of vacation/taking over possession of the land/property.
18. Any dereliction in performing compliance of aforesaid direction
or laxity to remove encroachment from Government/Forest land shall be
taken seriously and consequential adverse action/proceedings shall ensue.
19. Entire aforesaid proceedings shall be video graphed and copy
of videography be placed on record with affidavit.
20. Learned Advocate General is directed to bring this order in the
notice of the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, for
ensuring timely compliance.
The petition is disposed of, so also pending application(s), if
any, in aforesaid terms.
List for compliance on 25th November, 2024.
(Vivek Singh Thakur),
Judge.
(Bipin C. Negi),
Judge.
17th September, 2024
(ms)
