Whether approved for reporting?¹Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file.

2. Respondent No.5 moved an application on 12.07.2018 (Annexure P-1) before the Assistant Collector 1st Grade (Rural), Shimla, H.P for carrying out demarcation of land comprised in Khewat No. 506, Khatauni No. 902, Khasra No. 3058/772, measuring 82.60 Sq. meters situated at Revenue Village Vikasnagar, Shimla, H.P.

2(i). The demarcation was carried out by the Competent Authority on 26.03.2021. During demarcation, petitioner, respondent No.5 and one Sh. Ramesh son of Sh. Nikju Ram made a joint statement as unfder (translation as supplied by learned counsel for respondent No.5):-

“1). Statement of Shri Ramesh Pal, son of Anup Ram, resident of Vikas Nagar, Tehsil Shimla ( Rural), aged-61 years.

2.) Statement of Shri Tilak Raj, son of Dhani Ram, resident of Vikasnagar, Tehsil Shimla (Rural), aged-66 years

3.) Statement of Shri Ramesh son of Nikju Ram resident of Vikasnagar, Tehsil Shimla (Rural), aged-69 years.

On oath h 26/3/2021

It is jointly stated that today on 26/03/2021, gthe Patwari Halka and Girdawar kanungo and Assistant Collector II Grade Shimla (Rural) had jointly i demarcated and measured land/ Arazi by fitakashi H comprised in Kha. No.3058/772, measuring 82.60 Sq.mts situated in Chak Vikas Nagar in Case No.62/2019 in the presence of all the plaintiffs and defendants and fixed mauka jaat and marked the land in dispute between the parties and accept the same. We all accept and are totally satisfied with the demarcation. We accept the demarcation which is carried out. We have given the statements consciously and the statements have been given without any pressure from any side. Now there is no dispute between the parties. We are totally satisfied and in agreement with the contents of the statements and have signed the same after reading and understanding the same.”

In terms of their joint statement, all the three individuals including the petitioner and respondent No.5 expressed their agreement with the demarcation conducted on the spot. The demarcation was confirmed on 26.03.2021 by the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade.

2(ii). The petitioner laid challenge to the aforesaid demarcation by preferring an appeal under Section 14 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The appeal was dismissed by the Collector, Shimla on 02.05.2024. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner next filed Revision Petition under Section 17 of the Act. The Revision Petition was also dismissed by the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), H.P. on 24.02.2025. It is in the above background that petitioner has instituted this writ petition seeking following substantive reliefs:-

(i) That the writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued for quashing orders dated 24.02.2025, 02.05.2024 and 25.03.2021 passed by respondents No. 2 to 4, respectively.

(ii) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing respondent No.4 to conduct the demarcation of Khasra No. 3058/772 afresh as per the application moved by respondent No.5 after associating the petitioner and doing videography and justice be done.”

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that in the instant case directions are required to be issued to respondent No.4 to conduct fresh demarcation on the application moved by the respondent No.5 after duly associating the petitioner in accordance with law. It was contended that though the petitioner fhad agreed to the demarcation that was conducted on the spot, but in the order passed by Assistant Collector, IInd Grade, there is some reference to the existence of a drainage over the passage between two buildings. This reference was uncalled for since the Competent Authority was only required to carry out the demarc