JUDGMENT :

SURESHWAR THAKUR, J.

1. Since both these writ petitions arise from a common verdict (Annexure P-10) (in CWP-28137-2017), and, Annexure P-9 (in CWP-3963- 2018) respectively, as became made on 14.11.2017, by the learned Collector concerned, thereby both are amenable for being decided through a common verdict. For brevity, the facts are being extracted from CWP-28137-2017.

2. The petitioners become aggrieved from Annexure P-10, whereby, the appellate authority concerned made a verdict of dismissal on 14.11.2017, upon, Case No.21/Appeal/VCL.

Submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued before this Court, that despite a well laid question of title erupting amongst the contesting litigants concerned, yet the said laid question of title neither becoming discussed, nor becoming adjudicated upon, in the impugned order. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners argues, that the above infirmity gripping the impugned order, requires that, after the said order becoming quashed and set aside, this Court proceeding to remand the lis to the statutory authority below, so as to enable it to remake a judgment on