JUDGMENT C.K. Thakker, C.J.—This petition is filed against the order passed by the District Judge, Bilaspur in Civil Appeal No. 80 of 1997. 2. It appears that against the respondent, proceedings were initiated under the provisions of the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1953, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) alleging that he had unauthorisedly encroached upon the Government land. Notice was issued to him as to why appropriate orders should not be passed. After considering the facts and circumstances, the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Ghumarwin vide order dated 23rd February, 1997 held that as per the report submitted by Patwari Halqua and Kanungo, respondent had encroached upon the land comprising Kahsra No. 523/1 admeasuring 0-0-12 Biswansis situated in village Samoh, Tehsil Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur adjacent to the road and land belonged to the Government. The statement of encroacher was recorded at the spot and he admitted that he had encroached upon Khasra No. 523/1. He had, however, stated that it was an old one. He also stated that if he would not remove the encroachment, he had no objection if the encroachment was removed by the Government. 3. It appears that the order was passed by the Assistant Collector on 23rd February, 1997 and the respondent-encroacher was ordered to be dispossessed from the land comprised of Khasra No. 523/1 admeasuring 0-0-12 Biswansis in exercise of powers under sub-section (1) of Section 163 of the Act. 4. Thus/though encroachment was admitted in the statement by respondent Lachhu Ram who had also stated that he would remove the encroachment within a period of one month and if he would not remove the encroachment, it would be open to the petitioner-State to evict him, he approached the District Court by filing Civil Appeal No. 80 of 1997. The District Judge by an order dated 6th January, 2000, allowed the appeal, set aside the order passed by the Assistant Collector and remanded the matter to him with a direction that he would decide the case afresh in accordance with the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 163 of the Act by giving reasonable opportunity to the appellant. The said order is challenged by the State in the present petition. 5. I have heard Mr. M.L. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the petitioner-State and Mr. D.C. Jishtu, learned Counsel for the respondent. 6. Only one contention has been raised by Mr. The said order is challenged by the State in the present petition. 5. I have heard Mr. M.L. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the petitioner-State and Mr. D.C. Jishtu, learned Counsel for the respondent. 6. Only one contention has been raised by Mr. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General. He submitted that when the proceedings were before the Assistant Collector and allegation of the State related to encroachment of land by the respondent and the encroachment was admitted by the encroacher and the order was passed under sub-section (1) of Section 163 of the Act, it was not open to the District Judge to entertain the appeal against the said order. 7. Now, sub-section (1) of Section 163 of the Act states that where Government land has been encroached upon by any person, appropriate proceedings can be initiated for evicting him from such land. Sub-section (3) states that where there is a question as to title or to the adverse possession and the person claims to be in adverse possession or asserts his title, the Assistant Collector shall proceed to determine the question "as if he were a civil court" and shall exercise such powers, as are exercisable by a Civil Court. Condition precedent for the exercise of power as a Civil Court, therefore, would arise only when a person alleged to have encroached upon the land (i) either claims ownership or title; or (ii) adverse possession. Sub-section (4) declares that in such cases, the Revenue Officer should follow the procedure as is applicable to a trial of an original suit by Civil Court and shall record a judgment and pass a decree, as required by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Sub-section (5) of the said Section thereafter provides an appeal to the District Court. 8. If, on the other hand, the person is proceeded under sub-section (1) of Section 163 of the Act as an encroacher and an order is passed by the Assistant Collector, neither sub-section (3) nor sub-section (4) of Section 163 of the Act would apply and, obviously, in those cases, a person aggrieved by an order passed by the Revenue Officer under sub-section (1) of Section 163 of the Act cannot invoke sub-section (5) of Section 163 of the Act. Even in such cases, the law provides remedy and the remedy is of filing an appeal under Section 14 of the Act. Even in such cases, the law provides remedy and the remedy is of filing an appeal under Section 14 of the Act. Section 14 declares that an appeal shall lie from original and appellate order of a Revenue Officer in certain cases and states that if the order is passed by an Assistant Collector, the appeal would lie to Collector. 9 As stated above, in the instant case, proceedings were initiated against the respondent under sub-section (1) of Section 163 of the Act. The respondent admitted in a statement that he was an encroacher. He also stated that he would remove the encroachment and if it would not be removed, it would be open to the State to take appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Taking into account the above facts and circumstances, an order was passed by the Assistant Collector under sub-section (1) of Section 163 of the Act. In my opinion, the submission made by Mr. Chauhan is well founded and must be upheld that the Assistant Collector was required to act as a Revenue Officer and not a Civil Court under subsections (3) and (4) of Section 163 of the Act. If it is so, it necessarily follows that the respondent could not have invoked jurisdiction of Civil Court under sub-section (5) of Section 163 of the Act. Since the District Judge has exercised power under sub-section (5) of Section 163 of the Act, the order passed by the District Judge must be held to be without jurisdiction and is liable to be set aside. 9. For the foregoing reasons, the petition deserves to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. The judgment and decree passed by the District Judge on 6th January, 2001 in Civil Appeal No. 80 of 1997 are hereby quashed and set aside. It is, however, clarified that it is open to the respondent, if he so wishes, to take appropriate proceedings treating the order passed by the Assistant Collector under sub-section (1) of Section 163 of the Act to prefer an appeal under Section 14 of the Act It was stated by the learned Counsel for the respondent that when the appeal was filed before the District Judge under sub-section (5) of Section 163 of the Act, it was within the period of limitation. The appeal was decided on 6th January, 2000 and thereafter the State has approached this Court and today the Court has disposed of the matter. He, therefore, prayed that some time may be granted to the respondent to avail of a remedy of appeal by invoking Section 14 of the Act. In my opinion, the prayer is reasonable. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that if the respondent intends to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority, he is at liberty to do so. If such an appeal is filed within a period of one month from today, the Appellate Authority shall entertain the appeal without raising any objection as to limitation and decide the same in accordance with law. 10. Before parting with the case, I may state that all the observations made by me hereinabove are only for the purpose of disposing of this petition and as and when the appeal will be taken up for hearing, if filed within the aforesaid period, the Appellate Authority will decide the same in accordance with law without being influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove. 11. Since the matter is very old. If such appeal is filed, the Appellate Authority will give priority and dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible. Till the disposal of the appeal, the respondent will not be dispossessed. The petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs. Petition allowed. -