Jamal Deen vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:41199)
2025 Latest Caselaw 13253 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 13253 Raj
Judgement Date : 16 September, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Jamal Deen vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:41199) on 16 September, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:41199]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17690/2025
1.       Jamal Deen S/o Late Shri Suleman Khan, Aged About 48
         Years, R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil Pokaran, District
         Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
2.       Amin Khan S/o Late Shri Suleman Khan, Aged About 43
         Years, R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil Pokaran, District
         Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
3.       Rasid Khan S/o Shri Jamal Deen, Aged About 24 Years,
         R/o Shekho Ka Tala, Tehsil Pokaran, District Jaisalmer,
         Rajasthan.
4.       Ikhtyar Khan S/o Shri Jamal Deen, Aged About 21 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,
         Distt.- Jaisalmer.
4.       The Colonization          Tehsildar,      Nachana        No.   2,   Distt.-
         Jaisalmer.
5.       The Executive Engineer, Shri Mohangarh Tmc Division,
         Indra Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna Shri Mohangarh, Jaisalmer.
6.       The Assistant Engineer, Shri Mohangarh TMC Division,
         Indra Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna Shri Mohangarh, Jaisalmer.
                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Sharwan Singh Nirban
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Arpit Samaria, AAAG for
                                  Mr. Nathur Singh Rathore, AAG



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

16/09/2025

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that

the controversy raised in the present writ petition is similar to the

one raised in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18356/2024

(Aarabdeen Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.) decided on

(Uploaded on 17/09/2025 at 11:24:19 AM)

[2025:RJ-JD:41199] (2 of 3) [CW-17690/2025]

11.11.2024. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the

said writ petition while relying upon the judgments passed in a

bunch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.13842/2015 (Gulsher Vs. State of Rajasthan) decided on

24.10.2017 and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11508/2017

(Gemar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present

writ petition may also be disposed of in the same terms as

Aarabdeen (supra). The relevant paras of the order is

reproduced herein below:

"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 petitioner shall be given irrigation facilities only, if, his 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

(Uploaded on 17/09/2025 at 11:24:19 AM)

[2025:RJ-JD:41199] (3 of 3) [CW-17690/2025]

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."

3. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed

the submission made on behalf of the petitioner, however, is not in

a position to refute the fact that the issue raised in the present

writ petition is identical to the one adjudicated in the case of

Aarabdeen (supra).

4. In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition is

disposed of in the same terms as was decided in the case of

Aarabdeen (supra).

5. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.

(SUNIL BENIWAL),J 16-Ashutosh/-

(Uploaded on 17/09/2025 at 11:24:19 AM)