JUDGMENT S. S Sidhu, F.C (A).—Shri Hariman and others have filed an application for implementing the orders of this Court passed in Revenue Appeal No. 20/85 and Review Petition No. 25/85. 2. The brief facts giving rise to this Miscellaneous Applications are that Shri Hariman and others had preferred an appeal against the order dated 25-6-1985 of the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla Division, who had upheld the order dated 21-1-1983 of the Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur. The Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur had sanctioned 4 biswas of land, comprised in Khasra No. 124/1, situated in village Dali, Pargana and Tehsil Sadar, District Bilaspur in favour of Shri Salig Ram, respondent No !. The contention of the appellants was that Shri Salig Ram did not belong to the same revenue estate where the land sanctioned to him in exchange, was situated. Another objection taken by them was that there was a source of drinking water close to the sanctioned land as well as the grazing ground. The Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Bilaspur was asked to inspect the spot and submitted his report. In his report, it was mentioned that Shri Salig Ram, respondent No. 1 was a resident of village Jhaleda, which falls in a separate Hadbast whereas the land was given to him in exchange was situated in village Dali. It was also mentioned by him that there is a water source on the opposite side of the road from where the villagers fetch drinking water. The land was also being used for grazing the village cattle. In view of the report of the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), and objections of the villagers, my learned predecessor, Shri R. K. Anand set aside the order dated 21-1-1983 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur upheld by the Divisional Commissioner. Shri Salig Ram filed a review petition against this order dated 2-11-1985, which was also not allowed by my learned predecessor, Shri Attar Singh vide his order dated 14-7-1986 As a result, orders passed in Revenue Appeal No. 20/85 and Review Petition No. 25/85, the grant made by the Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur stood revoked. Shri Salig Ram filed a review petition against this order dated 2-11-1985, which was also not allowed by my learned predecessor, Shri Attar Singh vide his order dated 14-7-1986 As a result, orders passed in Revenue Appeal No. 20/85 and Review Petition No. 25/85, the grant made by the Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur stood revoked. Shri Hariman in this Miscellaneous Application has stated that the orders passed in the appeal and review petition have not been implemented by the Revenue Officers of Bilaspur District- They have brought another fact to the light that the Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur instead has sanctioned the same land in the same revenue estate, measuring 4biswas in favour of Shri Salig Ram, present respondent No. 1 vide his order dated 11-10-1989 under the Scheme for Regularisation of Encroachments. 3. I have heard the applicants, respondent and also the learned District Attorney, who appeared on behalf of the State. The perusal of the record reveals that Shri Salig Ram, respondent No 1 bad filed a civil suit in the court of Sub-Judge, Bilaspur titled as Salig Ram v. State and others". The said suit is reported to be dismissed by the learned Sub-Judge, Bilaspur vide his order dated 2-12-1987 wherein it was held that Shri Salig Ram had no right to retain the possession of the said land on which he was simply encroacher and liable to be evicted under section 163 of the H. P. Land Revenue Act. Since the orders passed by my learned predecessors, Sarv-shri R. K. Anand and Attar Singh on 2-11-1985 and 14-7-1986 respectively had not been implemented, the Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur was asked to give his comments on the miscellaneous application filed by Shri Hariman and others. 4. The Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur has sent his comments stating that the orders of the learned Financial Commissioners could not be implemented for the reasons that the learned Sub-Judge, Bilaspur had granted the status quo in a case filed by Shri Salig Ram during the pendency about possession of suit land. Later on, the Additional District Judge, Bilaspur ordered the status quo qua possession till further orders. It has been stated by the Deputy Commissioner that in the meantime, the Government introduced a policy to regularise the old encroachments and Shri Salig Ram, respondent No. 1 applied for regularisation of encroachment alongwith copy of the order dated 22-9-1981 of the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade. It has been stated by the Deputy Commissioner that in the meantime, the Government introduced a policy to regularise the old encroachments and Shri Salig Ram, respondent No. 1 applied for regularisation of encroachment alongwith copy of the order dated 22-9-1981 of the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade. The application for regularisation of the encroached land measuring four biswas, comprised in Khasra No. 258/124 (old Khasra No. 124/1) situated in village Dali, was allowed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur vide his order dated 11-10-1989 and Shri Salig Ram was sanctioned the aforesaid land, measuring four biswas in accordance with the regularisation policy introduced by the Government. 5. No appeal or revision has been provided under the Policy for Regularisation of Encroachments before this Court As such, we do not feel it appropriate to make any comments on the order dated 11-10-1989 passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur. The present applicants raised lot of objections and it was after taking into consideration the spot inspection report submitted by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Bilaspur that my learned predecessor, Shri R. K. Anand passed his order dated 2-11-1985. While rejecting the review petition filed by Shri Salig Ram, respondent No. 1, Shri Attar Singh, my another learned predecessor had inspected the spot in presence of the estate right-holders and present respondent No. 1s son, Shri Rajinder Singh. Since the applicants are still having objections in respect of the suit land, the Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur may like to examine whether the orders dated 11-10-1989 passed by his learned predecessor are in accordance with the instructions issued by (he Government from time to time for regularisation of the encroachments. He may pass any order he deems appropriate after examining the case. Order be communicated to the parties. Order accordingly.