P. D. Desai, C.J.:-Rule. To be heard to-day. 2. The learned Advocate General waives service of the Rule on behalf of the respondents.

3. The petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (Act No. 21 of 1860). The petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of three buildings along with the land appurtenant thereto situate in a locality known as Moti Tibba in the town of Dalhousie which falls within the revenue limits of District Chamba. Adjacent to the said property is situate a property belonging to the State Government (first respondent) in which a Government High School is being run since long. In or about Sept. 1981, the petitioner as well as the school authorities made an application to the competent authority under S.107, sub-sec.(1) of the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for defining the limits or boundaries between the property owned by the petitioner and that owned by the first respondent. The competent authority demarcated the boundaries on Oct. 19, 1981 in the presence of the representatives of the parties as per the copy of the proceedings produced at Annexure-B. The demarcation made accordingly disclosed that O.3590 acre of land forming part of the petitioners property was encroached upon and formed part of the first respondents property in possession of the school authorities. Pursuant to the demarcation made as aforesaid, separate khasra numbers were given to the properties in question and tatimas were also prepared.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that thereafter boundary pillars were erected to define the limits but barbed wire fencing was not done at the request of the school authorities in order to enable them to use a portion of the property belonging to the petitioner as play-ground till the petitioner took up the construction of a superstructure and till alternative arrangements were made by the school authorities. Later on, the Director of Education, Himachal Pradesh, issued directions to the school authorities on July 30, 1983 (Annexure-C) to hand over possession of the encroached land to the petitioner who needed the same for the construction of a Satsang Hall. The school authorities, in compliance with such directions, handed over actual possession of the encroached land to the petitioner on Aug 8, 1983 (Annexure-D). After physical possession of the land was accordingly handed over, the petitioner applied to the municipality for the sanction of plan for the construction of the Satsang Hall on Aug. 15, 1983 (Annexure-E). The plan was duly sanctioned and the sanction was conveyed under the letter dated Jan

5. 1984 issued by the Secretary of the Municipal Committee, Dalhousie, (Annexure-H). Be it stated at this stage that the second respondent (Collector-/S. D. O. (C), Dalhousie, District Chamba) is also the Administrator of the Dalhousie Municipal Committee. After the petitioner actually started construction of the Satsang Hall and while the construction was in progress, the impugned order dated May 9,1984 (Annexure-I) was issued and served upon the petitioner containing a direction "to stop the construction work forthwith till proper demarcation is given afresh by the Competent Revenue Authority". Hence the present writ petition.

5. S.4 of the Act defines certain words and expressions. The definition of the words "estate", "holding", "Revenue Officer" and "survey-mark" given in clauses (5), (7), (17) and (19) respectively and, reproduced herein below, is material for the present purposes : "(5) "estate" means any area :- (a) for which a separate record-of-rights has been made, or (b) which has been separately assessed to land revenue, or would have been so assessed if the land revenue had not been released, compounded for or redeemed, or (c) which the State Government may, by general rule or special order, declare to be an estate ; (6) xxx xxxx xxx xxx (7) "holding" means a share or portion of an estate he