Bhinu vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 8671 Raj

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 8671 Raj
Judgement Date : 1 October, 2024

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Bhinu vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 1 October, 2024

Author: Rekha Borana

Bench: Rekha Borana

[2024:RJ-JD:40605]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16457/2024

1.       Bhinu W/o Late Shri Meere Khan, Aged About 86 Years,
         R/o    Sakadiya,        Tehsil      Pokaran,         District      Jaisalmer,
         Rajasthan.
2.       Sadiq S/o Late Shri Meere Khan, Aged About 57 Years, R/
         o Sakadiya, Tehsil Pokaran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
3.       Neke Khan S/o Late Shri Meere Khan, Aged About 55
         Years, R/o Sakadiya, Tehsil Pokaran, District Jaisalmer,
         Rajasthan.
4.       Murad Khan S/o Late Shri Meere Khan, Aged About 54
         Years, R/o Sakadiya, Tehsil Pokaran, District Jaisalmer,
         Rajasthan.
5.       Smt. Sarifo D/o Late Shri Meere Khan, Aged About 53
         Years, R/o Sakadiya, Tehsil Pokaran, District Jaisalmer,
         Rajasthan.
                                                                     ----Petitioners
                                     Versus
1.       The State Of Rajasthan,                 Through          Secretary (Water
         Resources Department), Jaipur, Raj.
2.       The Commissioner Colonization, Bikaner, Raj.
3.       The Dy. Commissioner, Colonization, Indra Gandhi Nahar
         Pariyojana, Nachana, District Jaisalmer, Raj.
4.       The Tehsildar, Colonization, Tehsil Nachana-2, District
         Jaisalmer, Raj.
5.       The    Executive       Engineer      (Irrigation),        T.m.c.    Division,
         Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyojana, Mohangarh, District
         Jaisalmer, Raj.
6.       The Assistant Engineer (Irrigation), T.m.c. Division, Indira
         Gandhi Nahar Pariyojana, Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer,
         Raj.
                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :    Mr. B.R. Jajra
For Respondent(s)           :    Mr. Nathu Singh Rathore, AAG




                      (Downloaded on 12/10/2024 at 10:41:03 PM)
 [2024:RJ-JD:40605]                    (2 of 4)                      [CW-16457/2024]


              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

01/10/2024

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that bunch of

identical petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.15559/2019 (Alabasaya vs State of Rajasthan) have

been disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order

dated 05.11.2019. He prayed that similar order be passed in the

present matter too.

2. Learned AAG appearing for the respondents, does not refute

the submission as made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. In case of Alabasaya (supra), the Co-ordinate Bench of this

Court observed/held/directed as under :-

"Mr. Khatri, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners own/possess land, yet the respondents are not providing irrigation facilities to the petitioners in view of the litigation though they are having interim orders in their favour.

Learned counsel for the petitioners also contended that number of petitions involving identical grievance have been allowed by this Court, vide judgment dated 25.1.2016, passed in a bunchy 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. Manish Tak, learned counsel appearing for the respondents in principal agreed that the issue is broadly covered, he, however, apprehended that in guise of the judgment of this Court, the petitioners are seeking irrigation

[2024:RJ-JD:40605] (3 of 4) [CW-16457/2024]

facilities to their land, even they are not in command area.

Having heard rival submissions, the present writ petitions are 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 petitioners shall be given irrigation facilities only if, their land(s) fall in the command area.

1. The petitioners shall approach respective Executive Engineer of IGNP Department by 30.11.2017 and furnish documentary evidence regarding their ownership and title of the agriculture lands, which is in their possession.

2. Those petitioners, who are not having any documentary evidence regarding their ownership and title of the said agriculture land but their disputes regarding title of the said agriculture land are pending either before departmental authorities or before competent courts and stay orders are passed in their favour, can also furnish copies of said stay orders passed by the departmental authorities or competent courts in their favour by 30.11.2017.

3. The respective Executive Engineer of IGNP Department after verifying the documentary evidence, furnished by the petitioners, or after taking into consideration the stay orders passed in their favour by the departmental authorities or competent courts shall consider the cases of the petitioners for inclusion of their names in barabandi for ensuing years strictly in accordance with law.

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

[2024:RJ-JD:40605] (4 of 4) [CW-16457/2024]

5. In case land(s) for which the petitioners are claiming irrigation facilities, do not fall in command area, the respondents shall not be bound to provide irrigation facility/barabandi.