in question primarily on the ground that he was settled in the land by the British army. With the efflux of time, they were cultivating fodder initially for the military horses and thereafter for themselves and claimed his right to title over the land on adverse possession. The learned Writ Court examined the issue in detail and found that the petitioner was brought into the said land by the British army for cultivating the land but it was found that in the case of various other petitioners identically situated, on the basis of undertaking given, they were permitted some time and thereafter they were evicted from the land. The matter went to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court also, vide order passed in the matters on 10.08.2018, refused to interfere into the matter and all petitions have been disposed of and in cases where undertaking, as granted in earlier writ petitions, were not granted, the Supreme Court has refused to interfere into the matter. The learned Writ Court has found that the petitioner is also identically situated like the set of petitioners who had given the undertaking and when eviction orders against similarly situated petitioners have been affirmed till the Supreme Court disposes of the matter and granted time to vacate the premises, the petitioner is also entitled to similar treatment.
