Mola Bux vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:43150)
2025 Latest Caselaw 13794 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 13794 Raj
Judgement Date : 25 September, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Mola Bux vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:43150) on 25 September, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:43150]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                           JODHPUR
            S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18557/2025

1.       Mola Bux S/o Shri Allhadad, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
         Bahala, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Rajasthan).
2.       Ayasa S/o Shri Allhadad, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
         Bahala, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Rajasthan).
                                                      ----Petitioners
                               Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary (Water
         Resources Department) Jaipur Rajasthan.
2.       The Commissioner Colonization, Bikaner.
3.       The Assistant Commissioner Colonization, Mohangarh No.
         1, Distt.- Jaisalmer.
4.       The Colonization Tehsildar, Mohangarh No. 1, Distt.-
         Jaisalmer.
5.       The Executive Engineer, Mohangarh Tmc Division, Indra
         Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna Mohangarh, Jaisalmer.
6.       The Assistant Engineer, Tmc Division, Indra Gandhi Nahar
         Pariyojna Mohangarh, Jaisalmer.
                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Sharwan Singh Nirban
                                  Ms. Anita Singh
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Mayank Shrma for
                                  Ms. Jaya Dadhich, AGC
                                  Mr. Praveen Khandelwal, AAG with
                                  Mr. Sunil Charniya
                                  Mr. Ram Avtar Sikhwal, AGC
                                  Mr. Arpit Samaria, Ms. Khushi
                                  Sharma, Mr. Digvijay Singh, Mr.
                                  Ravindra Chaudhary, AGC for
                                  Mr. Nathu Singh Rathore, AAG



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

25/09/2025

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners 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

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

(Uploaded on 26/09/2025 at 10:42:52 AM)

[2025:RJ-JD:43150] (2 of 3) [CW-18557/2025]

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 petitioners submits that the present

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

case of Aarabdeen (supra). The relevant part 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 their favour by the departmental authorities or competent courts shall

(Uploaded on 26/09/2025 at 10:42:52 AM)

[2025:RJ-JD:43150] (3 of 3) [CW-18557/2025]

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 10-ajayS/-

(Uploaded on 26/09/2025 at 10:42:52 AM)