HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12821/2015
1. Subhash S/o Shri Jagmal, B/c Jat, Aged about 50 years, R/o Chak 14 S.P.M., Tehsil Sadulshahar, District Sri Ganganagar.
2. Gopi Ram S/o Shri Jagmal, B/c Jat, Aged about 44 years, R/o Chak 14 S.P.M., Tehsil Sadulshahar, District Sri Ganganagar.
----Petitioners Versus
1. State of Rajasthan Through Executive Engineer, Water Resources Circle, Hanumangarh
2. Superintending Engineer, Water Resources Circle, Hanumangarh
3. Maya D/o Hajari Ram Jat
4. Sharda D/o Hajari Ram Jat
5. Radhey Shyam S/o Late Guddi Devi D/o Hajari Ram Jat. Respondent Nos.3 to 5 all resident of Chak 14 S.P.M., Tehsil Sadulshahar, District Sri Ganganagar.
6. Legal Representatives of Jangir Singh S/o Bishan Singh:- 6/1 Ram Singh S/o Late Shri Jangir Singh B/c Jat Sikh, R/o Kharuwali, Tehsil Gharsana, District Sri Ganganagar. 6/2 Gurnam Singh S/o Late Shri Jangir Singh B/c Jat Sikh, R/o Kewalawali, Tehsil Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. G.R. Goyal
Ms. Varsha Goyal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.S. Sandhu
Ms. Saloni Malpani for
Ms. Abhilasha Bora
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
01/12/2022
The tracking report for respondent Nos. 6/1 and 6/2 is taken on record.
As per the tracking report filed for service upon respondent Nos. 6/1 and 6/2, the notices are reported to be delivered, thus, service upon respondent Nos. 6/1 and 6/2 is complete.
Despite service, nobody has appeared on behalf of respondent Nos. 6/1 and 6/2.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(Downloaded on 02/12/2022 at 11:49:26 PM)
(2 of 5) [CW-12821/2015] The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 20.10.2015 passed by the Superintending Engineer, Water Resources Division, Hanumangarh.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is an ongoing dispute with respect to the performance of the agreement to sell the land in question. He submits that there are rival claims before the courts seeking ownership of the land. The matter with respect to the same is pending consideration in First Appeal bearing S.B.C.F.A. No. 721/2006 before this Court. He further submits that the present controversy is only with respect to the non-implementation of the order dated 05.11.2005 (Annex. 5) passed by Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division-I, Hanumangarh Junction, whereby the water turn was fixed in favour of Khata No.84 cancelling the water turn of Khata No.96.
Learned counsel further submits that vide order dated 05.11.2005, the water which was being received on the land ad measuring 4 Bighas (Khata No.84) was changed vide letter dated 26.04.2005 and this water was being supplied to the land of Khata No.96. On a challenge being made, the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division-I, Hanumangarh Junction vide order dated 05.11.2005 allowed the appeal/application of the appellant/applicant and ordered that the land of 4 Bighas (Khata No.84) will continue to get the water supply for irrigation. This order dated 05.11.2005 was assailed by way of filing an appeal before the Superintending Engineer by respondent No.6 Jangir Singh, but the same was dismissed vide judgment dated 04.04.2006. The order dated 04.04.2006 was not challenged further and thus, the same had attained finality. (Downloaded on 02/12/2022 at 11:49:26 PM)
(3 of 5) [CW-12821/2015] Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the First Appeal, since an interim order was passed for maintaining the status quo with respect to the possession of the land but the respondent-authorities did not comply with the order passed by the Executive Engineer on 05.11.2005. He submits that in these circumstances, an application for clarification of the interim order was filed before this Court and this Court vide order dated 20.01.2015, clarified/modified the earlier status quo order and it was left open for the irrigation authorities with respect to the grant of water turn over the land in dispute.
In these circumstances, after the clarification made by this Court on 20.01.2015, the petitioners preferred an application before the Executive Engineer and the Executive Engineer vide order dated 04.08.2015 allowed the same with a direction to comply with the water turn facility in accordance with the earlier order dated 05.11.2005. Against this order dated 04.08.2015, the respondents preferred an appeal and the appellate authority vide order dated 20.10.2015 passed an order of status quo to be maintained on the water turn on the subject piece of land and the same was further ordered to be decided after the decision of the First Appeal with respect to the ownership of the land. Learned counsel submits that the appellate authority committed an error by passing the order dated 20.10.2015 as the present dispute does not relate with respect to the ownership/title of the land and since the order dated 05.11.2005 passed by the Executive Engineer is only with respect to the water turn and for providing the water to the 4 Bighas of land as per the Khata No.84, therefore, the order passed by the appellate authority on 20.10.2015 is beyond the scope of the subject matter before him. (Downloaded on 02/12/2022 at 11:49:26 PM)
(4 of 5) [CW-12821/2015] He, therefore, prays that this writ petition may be allowed and the respondents may be directed to comply with the order dated 05.11.2005 passed by the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division- I, Hanumangarh Junction.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents vehemently argued that the water turn cannot be made in favour of the petitioner until the rights on the land are finalized. He further submits that the respondents are in possession of the land in question and, therefore, the Superintending Engineer was right while allowing their appeal vide order dated 20.10.2015. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be dismissed.
I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant record of the case including the order impugned dated 20.10.2015.
The present controversy is not for deciding the title and ownership of the land in question. The only dispute before this Court is that in pursuance of the order issued by the Executive Engineer on 05.11.2005, the water turn (Khata No.84) is to be restored. Against this order dated 05.11.2005, the respondent No.6 preferred an appeal and the same was rejected vide order dated 04.04.2006. In these circumstances, the order for water turn to be given on 4 Bighas of land (Khata No.84) has become final and, therefore, the respondents are under an obligation to supply the water turn to 4 Bighas of land as per Khata No.84. There might have been some confusion with the respondent- authorities with respect to the status quo issued by this Court in the First Appeal preferred by respondent No.6, however, that was also clarified by this Court vide order dated 20.01.2015. The order dated 20.01.2015 reads as under:-
(Downloaded on 02/12/2022 at 11:49:26 PM)
(5 of 5) [CW-12821/2015] "Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and upon perusal of the record of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the blanket stay order directing both the parties to maintain status-quo deserves to be modified and the issue of water-turn over the land in dispute should be left open to be decided by the Irrigation Authorities in accordance with the relevant Act and Rules framed thereunder. It is directed that the ex parte interim order dated 21.12.2006 directing both the parties to maintain status quo will not come in way of the Irrigation Authorities, while deciding the issue of water-turns for the land in dispute."
Since the case in hand does not pertain to the ownership/title/sale of the land in question and is only confined to the water turn to be made available on the subject piece of land, this Court is firmly of the view that since the order dated 05.11.2005 attained finality, the respondents are under an obligation to comply with the same and supply the water as per its turn to 4 Bighas of land (Khata No.84).
In view of the discussions made above, the writ petition is allowed and the order dated 20.10.2015 passed by the Superintending Engineer, is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to comply with the order passed by the Executive Engineer on 05.11.2005.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 73-Payal/-
(Downloaded on 02/12/2022 at 11:49:26 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)