Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dhayam Khan vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:43923) on 24 October, 2024
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2024:RJ-JD:43923]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17749/2024
1. Dhayam Khan S/o Late Shri Ahmed Khan, Aged About 54
Years, R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District -
Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
2. Hamdeen S/o Late Shri Ahmed Khan, Aged About 49
Years, R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District -
Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
3. Hanif Khan S/o Late Shri Ahmed Khan, Aged About 46
Years, R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District -
Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
4. Ajij Khan S/o Late Shri Ahmed Khan, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District -
Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
5. Nizamudeen S/o Shri Allabux, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District - Jaisalmer,
Rajasthan.
6. Ise Khan S/o Shri Allabux, Aged About 58 Years, R/o
Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District - Jaisalmer,
Rajasthan.
7. Habu Khan S/o Shri Allabux, Aged About 57 Years, R/o
Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District - Jaisalmer,
Rajasthan.
8. Jame Khan S/o Shri Allabux, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District - Jaisalmer,
Rajasthan.
9. Sumar Khan S/o Shri Kabool Khan, Aged About 57 Years,
R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District - Jaisalmer,
Rajasthan.
10. Khair Khan S/o Shri Kabool Khan, Aged About 44 Years,
R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District - Jaisalmer,
Rajasthan.
11. Iqbal Khan S/o Shri Kabool Khan, Aged About 41 Years,
R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District - Jaisalmer,
Rajasthan.
12. Hamas Khan S/o Shri Kabool Khan, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District - Jaisalmer,
Rajasthan.
[2024:RJ-JD:43923] (2 of 4) [CW-17749/2024]
13. Mohd. Nawaj S/o Shri Kabool Khan, Aged About 38 Years,
R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District - Jaisalmer,
Rajasthan.
14. Amerdeen S/o Shri Kabool Khan, Aged About 34 Years, R/
o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District - Jaisalmer,
Rajasthan.
15. Barkat Khan S/o Shri Kabool Khan, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil - Pokaran, District - Jaisalmer,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary (Water
Resources Department), Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Commissioner Colonization, Bikaner.
3. The Dy. Commissioner, Colonization I.g.n.p., Nachana,
Dist. - Jaisalmer.
4. The Colonization Tehsildar, Nachana No. 1, Distt. -
Jaisalmer.
5. The Executive Engineer, Mohangarh Tmc Division, Indira
Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna Mohangarh, Jaisalmer.
6. The Assistant Engineer, Mohangarh Tmc Division, Indira
Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna Mohangarh, Jaisalmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. OP Sangwa
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Rathore, AAG
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
24/10/2024
1. Mr. N.S. Rathore, learned Additional Advocate General puts in
appearance on behalf of the respondents.
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is
[2024:RJ-JD:43923] (3 of 4) [CW-17749/2024]
squarely covered by the judgment dated 25.01.2016 passed in a
bunch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.13842/2015 (Gulsher Vs. State of Rajasthan), which has
been duly followed by another co-ordinate Bench in decision dated
24.10.2017 passed in SBCWP No.11508/2017 (Gemar Singh
Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits 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 order in their favour.
4. Mr. N.S. Rathore, learned Additional Advocate General
appearing for the respondents in principal agreed that the issue is
broadly covered, however, apprehended that in guise of the
judgment of this Court, the petitioners are seeking irrigation
facilities to their lands, even when they are not in the command
area.
5. 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 petitioners shall be given irrigation
facilities only, if, their land(s) fall in the command area.
"(i) The petitioner shall approach respective
Executive Engineer of IGNP Department within two
weeks from today and furnish documentary
evidence regarding their ownership and title of the
agriculture lands, which is in their possession.
(ii) The petitioner, who is not having any
documentary evidence regarding his ownership
and title of the said agriculture land but the
dispute regarding title of the said agriculture land
is pending either before departmental authorities
or before competent courts and stay order is
passed in their favour, can also furnish copies of
[2024:RJ-JD:43923] (4 of 4) [CW-17749/2024]
said stay order passed by the departmental
authorities or competent courts within two weeks
from today.
(iii) 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
their favour by the departmental authorities or
competent courts shall consider the cases of the
petitioner for inclusion of his names in barabandi
for ensuing years strictly in accordance with law.
(iv) It is made clear that the petitioner, who
is presently getting the irrigation facilities to their
agriculture fields, will continue to get the same till
next barabandi is fixed by the IGNP
Department.
(v) In case land(s) for which the petitioner is
claiming irrigation facilities, do not fall in culturable
command area, the respondents shall not be
bound to provide irrigation facility/barabandi."
6. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
160-akansha/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
