Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Beva Habiba Khatu vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:49654) on 18 November, 2025
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:49654]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 22674/2025
1. Beva Habiba Khatu W/o Lakhe Khan, Aged About 50 Years,
Resident Of Sekho Ka Tala, Tehsil Pokran, Dist. Jaisalmer.
2. Amardeen S/o Lakhe Khan, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of
Sekho Ka Tala, Tehsil Pokran, Dist. Jaisalmer.
3. Dule Khan S/o Lakhe Khan, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of
Sekho Ka Tala, Tehsil Pokran, Dist. Jaisalmer.
4. Mahboob Khan S/o Lakhe Khan, Aged About 22 Years,
Resident Of Sekho Ka Tala, Tehsil Pokran, Dist. Jaisalmer.
5. Saidulla S/o Lakhe Khan, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of
Sekho Ka Tala, Tehsil Pokran, Dist. Jaisalmer.
6. Rasid Khan S/o Lakhe Khan, Aged About 19 Years, Resident Of
Sekho Ka Tala, Tehsil Pokran, Dist. Jaisalmer.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, (Water Resources
Department), Jaipur.
2. The Commissioner Colonization, Bikaner.
3. The Deputy Commissioner, Colonization Indra Gandhi Nahar
Pariyojana Nachana, Disst. Jaisalmer.
4. The Tehsildar, Colonization, Tehsil Nachana No. 2, District
Jaisalmer.
5. The Executive Engineer (Irrigation), Krm. Division, Indra
Gandhi Nahar Pariyojana, Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer.
6. The Assistant Engineer (Irrigation, Krm. Division, Indra Gandhi
Nahar Pariyojana, Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Roshan Lal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Digvijay Singh
Mr. Shanu Prajapat for Mr. NS Rathore,
AAG
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
18/11/2025
(Uploaded on 18/11/2025 at 03:30:16 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:49654] (2 of 3) [CW-22674/2025]
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.
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
(Uploaded on 18/11/2025 at 03:30:16 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:49654] (3 of 3) [CW-22674/2025]
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/211-
(Uploaded on 18/11/2025 at 03:30:16 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
