Surendra Singh And Ors vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 4536 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5503/2018

1. Ratan Devi W/o Shri Ballabh Das, aged about 63 years, By Caste Brahmin, Resident Village Gogliwala, Tehsil- Pugal, District Bikaner.

At Present Resident Of Gajner Road Near Daga Tubwell, Bikaner.

2. Kammu Khan S/o Shri Jindu Khan, aged about 63 years, Resident Of Village Gogliwala Rohi, Tehsil- Pugal, District Bikaner.

----Petitioners Versus

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

2. The Deputy Secretary To The Government, Indira Gandhi Nagar Department, Jaipur.

3. The Chief Engineer, Indira Gandhi Nahar Project, Bikaner.

4. The Executive Engineer, 16Th Division, Indira Gandhi Nagar Project, Bikaner.

----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7493/2018

1. Anni Devi W/o Ram Pratap Jat,

2. Ravindra Kumar S/o Devi Lal Jat,

3. Indu Bala D/o Devi Lal Jat,

4. Urmila D/o Devi Lal Jat,

5. Pramila D/o Devi Lal Jat,

6. Mangati Devi W/o Bhagirath Kumhar,

7. Laxmi Devi W/o Devi Lal Jat, All Resident Of Amarpura, Tehsil Puggal, District Bikaner.

----Petitioners Versus

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

(2 of 9) [CW-5503/2018]

2. The Deputy Secretary To The Government, Indira Gandhi Nagar Department, Jaipur.

3. The Chief Engineer, Indira Gandhi Nahar Project, Bikaner.

4. The Executive Engineer, 16Th Division, Indira Gandhi Nagar Project, Bikaner.

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7513/2018 Mohan Singh S/o Sh. Chaggan Singh, aged about 64 years, Resident Of Surasar, Tehsil Puggal, District Bikaner At Present Residing At Subhashpura, Bikaner.

----Petitioner Versus

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

2. The Deputy Secretary To The Government, Indira Gandhi Nahar Department, Jaipur.

3. The Chief Engineer, Indira Gandhi Nahar Project, Bikaner.

4. The Executive Engineer, 16Th Division, Indira Gandhi Nahar Project, Bikaner.

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7620/2018 Salam Singh S/o Sh. Ridhmal Singh, aged about 62 years, By Caste Rajput, Resident Of Surasar, Tehsil Puggal, District Bikaner At Present Residing At Tilak Nagar, Bikaner.

----Petitioner Versus

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

2. The Deputy Secretary To The Government, Indira Gandhi Nagar Department, Jaipur.

3. The Chief Engineer, Indira Gandhi Nahar Project, Bikaner.

4. The Executive Engineer, 16Th Division, Indira Gandhi Nagar Project, Bikaner.

                                                               ----Respondents





                                         (3 of 9)                    [CW-5503/2018]

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7359/2018

1. Upendra Singh S/o Sh.Umaid Singh, aged 44 years,

2. Mohan Singh S/o Sh. Bhagwan Singh, aged 68 years, Both By Caste Rajput, Resident Of Surasar, Tehsil Puggal, District Bikaner At Present Residing At Subhashpura, Bikaner.

----Petitioners Versus

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

2. The Deputy Secretary To The Government, Indira Gandhi Nahar Department, Jaipur.

3. The Chief Engineer, Indira Gandhi Nahar Project, Bikaner.

4. The Executive Engineer, 16 Th Division, Indira Gandhi Nagar Project, Bikaner.

----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7547/2018

Ravindra Singh S/o Sh. Mohan Singh, By Caste Rajput, aged about 60 years, 32Resident Of Surasar, Tehsil Puggal, District Bikaner At Present Residing At Subhashpura, Bikaner.

----Petitioner Versus

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

2. The Deputy Secretary To The Government, Indira Gandhi Nagar Department, Jaipur.

3. The Chief Engineer, Indira Gandhi Nahar Project, Bikaner.

4. The Executive Engineer, 16Th Division, Indira Gandhi Nagar Project, Bikaner.

                                                               ----Respondents





                                         (4 of 9)                     [CW-5503/2018]

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7595/2018

1. Girdhari Singh S/o Sh. Kalyan Singh, aged about 30 years, By Caste Rajput, Resident Of Surasar, Tehsil Puggal, District Bikaner At Present Residing At Amarsinghpura, Bikaner.

2. Himmat Singh S/o Sh. Madan Singh, aged about 40 years, By Caste Rajput, Resident Of Surasar, Tehsil Puggal, District Bikaner At Present Residing At Amarsinghpura, Bikaner.

----Petitioners Versus

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

2. The Deputy Secretary To The Government, Indira Gandhi Nagar Department, Jaipur.

3. The Chief Engineer, Indira Gandhi Nahar Project, Bikaner.

4. The Executive Engineer, 16Th Division, Indira Gandhi Nagar Project, Bikaner.

----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7619/2018

1. Surendra Singh S/o Sh. Bhanwar Singh, aged about 48 years,

2. Smt. Kishan Kanwar W/o Sh. Bhanwar Singh, aged 68 years,

3. Smt. Laxmi Kanwar W/o Surendra Singh, aged about 42 years, All Resident Of Surasar Rohi, Tehsil Puggal, District Bikaner At Present Residing At Subhashpura, Bikaner.

----Petitioners Versus

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

2. The Deputy Secretary To The Government, Indira

(5 of 9) [CW-5503/2018]

Gandhi Nahar Department, Jaipur.

3. The Chief Engineer, Indira Gandhi Nahar Project, Bikaner.

4. The Executive Engineer, 16Th Division, Indira Gandhi Nagar Project, Bikaner.

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16389/2018

Bhanwar Singh S/o Shri Jugal Singh, Aged About 46 Years, R/o.Purani Ginani, Near Gayatri Mandir, Bikaner.

----Petitioner Versus

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

2. The Deputy Secretary To The Government, Indira Gandhi Nagar Department , Jaipur.

3. The Chief Engineer, Indira Gandhi Nagar Project, Bikaner.

4. The Executive Engineer, 16Th Division, Indira Gandhi Nagar Project, Bikaner.

5. Shyama Purohit W/o Late Shri Jagdish Chandra, R/o. Bheru Singhji Ki Gali Ke Pichhe, Kuchhilpura, Bikaner.

6. Mahesh Chandra S/o.Late Shri Jagdish Chandra, R/o. Bheru Singhji Ki Gali Ke Pichhe, Kuchhilpura, Bikaner.

7. Tarun S/o.Late Shri Jagdish Chandra, R/o. Bheru Singhji Ki Gali Ke Pichhe, Kuchhilpura, Bikaner.

8. Rakhi D/o.Late Shri Jagdish Chandra, R/o. Bheru Singhji Ki Gali Ke Pichhe, Kuchhilpura, Bikaner.

9. Nirmala D/o.Late Shri Jagdish Chandra, R/o. Bheru Singhji Ki Gali Ke Pichhe, Kuchhilpura, Bikaner.

10. Jamana D/o.Late Shri Jagdish Chandra, R/o. Bheru Singhji Ki Gali Ke Pichhe, Kuchhilpura, Bikaner.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. BS Sandhu & Mr. Kuldeep Mathur Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Dhirendra Singh Sodha For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Tak, AGC

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

(6 of 9) [CW-5503/2018]

Order

23/03/2022

The cases are listed on the applications for vacation of

interim orders, however with consent of learned counsel for the

parties, the writ petitions are being heard and decided finally at

this stage by this common order as impugned orders in all the writ

petitions are similar and the issue involved in all these writ

petitions is also identical.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that fields of the

petitioners are irrigated through siphons since 1982 from the

Rajasthan Canal. Learned counsel further submits that on the

earlier occasion also, the persons like petitioners had approached

this court and directions have been issued that the petitioners

may appear before the Local Executive Engineer and satisfy the

need of water individually for the purpose of providing the

requisite amount of water through siphons till the irrigation

facilities otherwise provided by the respondents and if the

Executive Engineer finds that adequate irrigation facility is

provided and the siphons are not required, in that event the

siphons will not be sanctioned. Learned counsel further submits

that in view of the directions issued by this court, the petitioners

appeared before the respective Executive Engineer and pleaded

their cases for providing adequate water facility for the irrigation

purposes. The Executive Engineer thereafter passed the orders

which were the subject matter of the litigation before this Court.

He further submits that in view of the other pronouncements by

this court as well as by the trial courts, the petitioners are

receiving the water facilities through siphons. Learned counsel

(7 of 9) [CW-5503/2018]

further submits that since the fields of the petitioners are being

irrigated through siphons facilities for last 40 years, the State

Government cannot discontinue the same by passing the orders

impugned in these writ petitions i.e. 27.11.2017 passed by Deputy

Secretary to Govt. Indira Gandhi Nahar Department, Jaipur and

05.04.2018 passed by Executive Engineer, 9016th Division,

Iganap, Bikaner. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

the order dated 05.04.2018 which affects the water facility of the

petitioners through siphons has been discontinued without giving

a reasonable opportunity of hearing to them. He, therefore, prays

that the orders dated 27.11.2017 and 05.04.2018 may be

quashed qua the petitioners.

Per contra, learned State counsel Mr. Tak submits that the

State Government is well within its right to take a decision on

distribution of water to the persons like petitioners while

considering the demand of the water facilities for irrigation vis-a-

vis drinking purposes. He submits that with the passage of time,

the demand for drinking water has increased manifold and,

therefore, State is under an obligation to give precedent to supply

of water for drinking purposes over the supply of water for

irrigation. Learned counsel submits that the State functionaries

have taken the decision in larger public interest and, therefore,

the orders dated 27.11.2017 and 05.04.2018 are just, proper and

correct. Learned State counsel very fairly submits that the orders

dated 27.11.2017 and 05.04.2018 have been passed without

giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. He candidly

submits that since the orders impugned are not in line of the

principles of natural justice, therefore, the State may be given an

opportunity to pass fresh orders after giving a reasonable

(8 of 9) [CW-5503/2018]

opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and all other effected

persons.

I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have

gone through the documents placed on record. The facts in the

present case are admitted to the extent that petitioners were

irrigating their fields since 1989 in pursuance of a decision taken

by the State Government in the year 1982 and the water being

provided through siphons. The fact of the matter that petitioners

are irrigating their fields through siphons system and the water

being provided from the Rajasthan Canal is not disputed.

Learned counsel for the parties are also in agreement that in

the litigation preferred before this court, the directions were

issued to the respective parties to present their cases before the

Executive Engineer and other State functionaries showing their

bonafide need to provide the water facilities. The decision of the

Executive Engineer/ Superintending Engineer were assailed before

this court and the judgments were pronounced.

Taking into consideration the background of these cases, the

admitted position which emerges clearly shows that petitioners

are irrigating their fields through siphons for more than 35 years.

A bare perusal of the orders dated 27.11.2017 and 05.04.2018

show that no opportunity of hearing was granted to the

petitioners before passing these orders and straightaway the

siphons facilities enjoyed by the petitioners were ordered to be

disconnected. In the considered opinion of this court, the action

taken by the respondents authorities is in gross violation of the

principles of natural justice as no opportunity of hearing has been

afforded before passing the orders which are having civil and evil

(9 of 9) [CW-5503/2018]

consequences, and, therefore, the orders are not sustainable in

the eye of the law.

In view of the discussions made above, the writ petitions are

allowed and the impugned orders dated 27.11.2017 and

05.04.2018 qua the petitioners are quashed and set aside.

It is made clear that the State Government will be free to

give a notice and after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to

the petitioners, pass a fresh order if they so desire.

In the event of passing an order against the petitioners

discontinuing the water facilities through siphons, the State

authorities will not straightaway disconnect the water facilities of

the petitioners for a period of 30 days from the date of its

decision. It is made clear that the status quo as exists today shall

be maintained till the authorities decide the matter.

The stay applications and other pending applications, if any

also stand disposed of.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 20-SanjayS/Kashish-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)