(1.) THE revision petition under section 17 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act has arisen out of the order passed by the Commissioner, Shimla division in revision No. 104 -2003 passed on 16.5.2007, whereby the revision petition of the petitioner filed before the Commissioner has been dismissed.
(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to this revision petition are that encroachment proceedings under section 163 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act were initiated against the present petitioner Shri Suresh Kumar for having encroached upon Government land bearing khasra No.974/874/494/1 measuring 0 -0 -6 bswansis, situated in village Dadahu, sub tehsil Dadahu, Distt. Sirmour. As a sequel to the above proceedings ejectment orders were passed against the petitioner by the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade Dadahu in case No.1/98 decided on 8.9.2000. This order was challenged in appeal before the Collector Nahan, Subdivision who dismissed the same vide his order dated 31.12.2002. A revision petition against this order was preferred before the Commissioner, Shimla Division, who also dismissed the same vide the impugned orders.
(3.) IN his arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner raised the questions whether the order passed by Assistant Collector, IInd Grade is legal or whether the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade was competent to hear the case. According to the learned counsel, prior to 1989 the law had not been amended; the Government had issued a notification dated 27.7.1985 wherein ejectment powers were given to Assistant Collector, IInd Grade, The amendment was incorporated in 1989 whereby powers of Assistant Collector, IInd Grade in encroachment cases was withdrawn. In support of his contention, the learned counsel cited the case Smt. Kanta Devi versus State of H.P. (RSA No.27 of 1999) decided on 17.3.2009. Lastly he argued that when there was plea of adverse possession, the question of title is involved; it has to be decided by the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade.