WPMS 1076/2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Heard Sri Lokendra Dobhal, learned Counsel for the petitioner. In all fairness, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has no possession over the land in dispute and the penalty imposed by the courts below may be set aside. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Ram Singh & Others v. State of U.P. through Advocate General & Others, 1987 A.W.C. 910 and contended that when the petitioner does not claim possession, damages could not have been imposed on him. In view of the aforesaid reasons, this case is squarely covered by the abovementioned judgment. Thus, the penalty imposed by the courts below is set aside. The writ petition is allowed to that extent only. (P.C.V., J.) 3.7.2008 Prabodh