The court affirmed that adverse possession requires continuous, open, and hostile possession for at least 12 years against individuals and 30 years against the State, with necessary documentary evidence.

Judgment

Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, J.

The petitioners in the present writ petition have assailed the order dated 09.11.1994 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Commissioner, Hisar Division, Hisar, whereby the revision petition under Section 13-A of the Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as “the Act of 1961”) against the order dated 28.07.1992 of the Collector, Jind, filed by one Baru, has been decided against the petitioners.

2. The brief facts of the present case are that the petitioners herein filed a suit for declaration under Section 13-A of the Act of 1961 and the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Jind, decreed the suit on 29.08.1986. Aggrieved against the same, respondent No.4 (Baru son of Lehri) filed an appeal before the Collector, Jind, who remanded the said appeal to the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Jind, vide order dated 04.08.1987 to give a well reasoned finding issuewise. Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Jind, decided the case on 26.10.1987 in favour of the petitioners. Respondent No.4 (Baru) went to the Court of Collector concerned, who vide the order dated 25.04.1988 set aside the order of the Assistant Collector 1st Grade and directed the Assistant Collector 1st Grade to give a self-contained finding on every issue. The petitioners filed application under Section 152 of the CPC and prayed for the amendment of the judgment dated 04.08.1987 passed by the Collector, Jind. The Collector concerned amended his own judgment on 31.05.1988. Respondent No.4 (Baru) approached the court of Commissioner who remanded the same vide his order dated 18.09.1989. The Court of the Commissioner came to the conclusion that the Collector has erred in treating the application under Section 152 of the CPC as an issue of clerical mistake and he directed the Collector concerned to decide the case within 60 days. The learned Collector, Jind, on the basis of remand order decided the case vide order dated 28.07.1992. According to this decision, the appeal of respondent No.4 (Baru) was dismissed. Respondent No.4 (Baru) assailed order dated 28.07.1992 of the Collector, Jind, by filing the revision petition before the Commissioner, Hisar Division, Hisar. The revision filed by respondent No.4 has been decided in his favour vide order dated 09.11.1994 by concluding that the petitioners could not prove their title by virtue of their adverse possession for 50 years because they could not produce any documentary evidence in respect of their possession.

3. The order dated 09.11.1994 passed by the learned Commissioner concerned in the revision petition under Section 13 of the Act of 1961, is impugned in the instant writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the impugned order of the learned Commissioner is non-speaking and non-reasoned, since the Commissioner did not discuss the evidence produced by the petitioners.

5. Per contra, Mr. P.P. Chahar, learned DAG, Haryana has argued on the lines of the impugned order dated 09.11.1994 (Annexure P-6).

6. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and have perused the impugned order and the records as available on the case file, we conclude as under:-

i) In the present case Section 7 of the Act of 1961 is relevant and therefore the same is reproduced as under:-

“7. Power to put Panchayat in possession of certain lands.--

(1) An Assistant Collector of the first grade having jurisdiction in the village may, either suo moto or on an application made to him by a Panchayat or an inhabitant of the village or the Block Development and Panchayat Officer or Social Education and Panchayat Officer, or any other Officer authorised by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, after making such summary enquiry as he may deem fit and in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed, eject any person who is in wrongful or unauthorised possession of the land or other immoveable property in the shamilat deh of that village which vests or is deemed to have been v