JUDGMENT :

Sureshwar Thakur, J.

The writ petitioner/respondent No.4 herein, in CWP No.704 of 1994, claimed the making of the hereinafter extracted mandamus, upon, the respondents:-

(a) Directing respondents No.1 to 3 to complete the consolidation proceedings within a time bound period not exceeding 6 months.

(b) Directing the respondents to put the petitioner in possession of his holdings prior to the consolidation proceedings in 1982 till and so long as the new proceedings under the Act are not finalized and further directing the respondents to pay to the petitioner compensation for the deprivation of his property for the period he remained out of possession till the date of possession is restored to him.

(c) Directing the Respondents to produce unto this Hon'ble Court the entire record relating to the consolidation proceedings so that justice is done.

(d) Any other writ, order or direction as may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.”

2. Through the impugned verdict made, upon, CWP No. 704 of 1994, by the learned Single Judge, the latter proceeded to, after accepting the proposals made in sub clauses (i) and (ii) of paragraph No. 5, by the Director, Consolidation of Holding, H.P., in, an affidavit of 22nd December, 2014, and, as, became sworn by the latter officer, and, as became tendered before the Court, in compliance, to, an order of 26.10.2004, hence, make a conclusion, that, the writ petitioner/respondent No.4 herein, becoming unlawfully deprived of possession of the writ property, (i) inasmuch as 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, (i) thereupon, the learned Single Judge proceeded to grant relief in paragraph No.16 of the impugned verdict, rather in consonance with the affidavit, of, 22nd December, 2004,. The afore occurring prior thereto observations become, the, bedrock, of, the order of disposal being made by the learned Single Judge, upon, CWP No. 704 of 1994.

3. Furthermore, there is also a reference in the impugned verdict about finality being assignable, to a judgment, and, decree pronounced by the Civil Court concerned, qua land measuring 42.6 kanals, and, that, upto, the finalization of the freshly instituted consolidation proceedings, the writ petitioner be put in physical possession of the writ property, or physical possession thereof be restored to the writ petitioner.

4. At the outset, the firmest conclusivity becomes assignable to the Order made by the Director Consolidation, upon, his exercising powers, under, Section 54 of the H.P. Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation Act) (hereinafter referred to as the Act), (i) wherethrough the apposite scheme of consolidation, as, prepared, vis-a-vis, the writ kahsra numbers became rescinded, (ii) and, a direction was pronounced, for, rather with the apposite consensus ad idem of all the right holder concerned, in the contentious writ khasra numbers, hence a fresh consolidation scheme being prepared, (iii) and, thereafter consolidation operations under the afore nomenclatured statute being embarked upon.

5. Necessarily, the valid embarking, upon, or recoursing to the statutory mandate enshrined in the Act, is, comprised in the relevant khasra numbers being free from any civil litigation, appertaining to the title, of, the landowners concerned, in, and, upon apposite khasra numbers, whereons, the, exercising(s) of jurisdiction, under, the Act, is, strived to be recoursed. Contrarily, if there is an acid contest, vis-a-vis, valid assumption(s) thereon of title, by any or all the landowners concerned, (I) thereupon, uptil the dispute appertaining to the validity, of, title, upon, the, khasra numbers concerned, of/or any of the land owners concerned, becomes enjoined to be complete