Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Same Khan Alias Samsadeen vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 6 November, 2025
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:47563]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21681/2025
1. Same Khan Alias Samsadeen S/o Late Shri Seejawal
Khan, Aged About 67 Years, R/o Village Bahla, Tehsil
Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
2. Zia Ui Haq @ Zau Haq S/o Shri Same Khan @
Samsadeen, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Bahla,
Tehsil Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
3. Mohammed Ali Khan S/o Shri Same Khan @ Samsadeen,
Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Bahla, Tehsil
Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
4. Soukat Khan S/o Shri Same Khan @ Samsadeen, Aged
About 32 Years, R/o Village Bahla, Tehsil Mohangarh,
District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
5. Khamise Khan S/o Shri Same Khan @ Samsadeen, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o Village Bahla, Tehsil Mohangarh,
District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
6. Mahendra Khan S/o Shree Same Khan @ Samsadeen,
Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Bahla, Tehsil
Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
7. Roje Khan S/o Shree Same Khan @ Samsadeen, Aged
About 23 Years, R/o Village Bahla, Tehsil Mohangarh,
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
Priyajana, Nachana, District Jaisalmer, Raj.
4. The Tehsildar, Colonization, Tehsil Nachna 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.
(Uploaded on 06/11/2025 at 05:11:58 PM)
(Downloaded on 06/11/2025 at 09:57:24 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:47563] (2 of 3) [CW-21681/2025]
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. BR Jajra
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arpit Samaria for Mr. NS Rathore,
AAG
Mr. Piyush Bhandari for Mr. Praveen
Khandelwal, AAG
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
06/11/2025
1. Mr. Nathu Singh 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
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 coordinate 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 owns/possesses land, yet the respondents are not
providing irrigation facilities to the petitioner in view of the
litigation, though they are having interim order in their favour.
4. Learned counsel 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.
(Uploaded on 06/11/2025 at 05:11:58 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:47563] (3 of 3) [CW-21681/2025]
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 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.
(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J
SURABHII/213-
(Uploaded on 06/11/2025 at 05:11:58 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
