Kadar Khan vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 9318 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16477/2018

Kadar Khan S/o Halim Khan, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Village Post Bandha, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Jaipur.

2. Commissioner, Colonization, Bikaner.

3. Deputy Commissioner, Colonization, Nachna, District Jaisalmer.

4. Tehsildar, Colonisation No. 1, Jaisalmer.

5. Executive Engineer, Tmc, Division, Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyozana, Mohangarh, Jaisalmer.

6. Executive Engineer, Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna, 23 Division, Mohangarh, Jaisalmer.

7. Assistant Irrigation Officer, Sub-Division I. Tmc Division, Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyozana, Jaisalmer.

8. Executive Engineer, Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna, Water Resources Division-II, Jaisalmer.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Ramdev. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kunal Sancheti.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

18/07/2022

Mr. Shreyash Ramdev, learned counsel for the petitioner

submitted that the petitioner owns/possesses land, yet the respondents

are not providing irrigation facilities to the petitioner in view of the

litigation, though, he is having interim order in his favour.

(2 of 3) [CW-16477/2018]

Learned counsel for the petitioner also contended that number of

petitions involving identical grievance have been allowed by this Court,

vide judgment dated 25.1.2016, passed in a bunch of writ petitions led

by SBCWP No.13842/2015 (Gulsher Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan &

Ors.); which has been duly followed by another coordinate Bench

decision dated 24.10.2017 passed in SBCWP No.11508/2017 (Gemar

Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.).

Mr. Sancheti, learned counsel appearing for the respondents in

principle agreed that the issue is broadly covered by the said judgment.

However, he apprehended that in guise of the judgment of this Court,

the petitioner is seeking irrigation facilities to his land, even though he

is not in command area.

Having heard rival submissions, the present writ petition is

disposed of in terms of the following directions given by this Court in

the cases of Gulsher Khan and Gemar Singh (supra), with further

directions that the petitioner shall be given irrigation facilities only if, his

land falls in the command area.

1. The petitioner shall approach respective Executive Engineer of IGNP Department by 20.11.2021 and furnish documentary evidence regarding his ownership and title of the agriculture land, which is in his possession.

2. In case the petitioner is not having any documentary evidence regarding his ownership and title of the said agriculture land but his dispute regarding title of the said agriculture land is pending either before departmental authorities or before competent Courts and stay order is passed in his favour, he can also furnish copies of the said stay order passed by the departmental authorities or competent Courts in his favour by 20.08.2022.

3. The respective Executive Engineer of IGNP Department after verifying the documentary evidence, furnished by the petitioner, or after taking into consideration the stay order passed in petitioner's favour by the departmental authorities or competent courts shall consider the case of the petitioner for inclusion of his name in barabandi for ensuing years strictly in accordance with law.

(3 of 3) [CW-16477/2018]

4. It is made clear that the petitioner, who is presently getting the irrigation facilities to his agriculture fields, will continue to get the same till next barabandi is fixed by the IGNP Department.

5. In case land for which the petitioner is claiming irrigation facilities, does not fall in culturable command area, the respondents shall not be bound to provide irrigation facility/ barabandi.

The stay application also stand disposed of accordingly.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 126-AnilS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)