Punjab-Haryana High Court
Raj Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Others on 24 January, 2012
Author: Paramjeet Singh
Bench: Paramjeet Singh
CWP No. 935 of 2011 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No. 935 of 2011
Date of Decision: January 24, 2012
Raj Kumar
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others.
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH
Present: Mr. Shalender Mohan, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sandeep S. Mann, Sr. DAG, Haryana,
for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
Mr. Girish Agnihotri, Sr. Advocate,
with Ms. Binayjeet Sheoran, Advocate,
for respondent Nos.5 and 6.
Paramjeet Singh, J.
The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of order dated 04.03.2010 (Annexure P/5) passed by respondent No.4 - Divisional Canal Officer, Hisar, order dated 02.04.2010 (Annexure P/7) passed by respondent No.3 - Superintending Canal Officer, Hisar, and order dated 15.12.2010 (Annexure P/10) passed by respondent No.2 - Chief Canal Officer, Panchkula under the Haryana Canal and Drainage Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
CWP No. 935 of 2011 2
Brief facts of the case are that petitioner is shareholder of outlet No. RD131135/R Rana Distributory and irrigating his fields since long through watercourse AB from the said outlet. This watercourse is lined by the HSMITC and about 151 acres of land is being irrigating from this watercourse, which amounts to 79 per cent of the irrigation. The private respondents moved an application for shifting of the head from outlet No. RD131135/R to 131575/R Rana Distributory. It is averred by the petitioner that there is no necessity of shifting of head because the watercourse is giving better irrigation and the official respondents also approved and sanctioned for remodeling the outlet for which estimate has been sanctioned. On the application of the private respondents, scheme was prepared and published under Section 81(1) of the Act. The said application of the private respondents has been allowed by the Divisional Canal Officer, Hisar vide order dated 27.08.2009 (Annexure P/3). Against the said order, the petitioner and other share holders preferred an appeal before the Superintending Canal Officer. Vide order dated 24.11.2009 (Annexure P/4), the Superintending Canal Officer remanded the case to the Divisional Canal Officer for re-examining the case. The Divisional Canal Officer vide order dated 04.03.2010 (Annexure P/5) again upheld the order dated 27.08.2009. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner and other shareholders preferred an appeal before Superintending Canal Officer and the Superintending Canal Officer has dismissed the appeal vide order dated 02.04.2010 (Annexure P/7). Against the order dated 02.04.2010, the petitioner and other share-holders filed an appeal before the Chief Canal Officer, and the same was also dismissed vide order dated 15.12.2010 CWP No. 935 of 2011 3 (Annexure P/10). Hence, this writ petition.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
The Chief Canal Officer vide order dated 15.12.2010 has passed the following order:-
"....Keeping in view the statements and adverse results of irrigation, it will be considered prudent to allow the shifting of water course AB to CD to RD 131575/R Rana Disty., with the following conditions:-
(i) This shifting is allowed only for about one year (for two crops) i.e. upto 30.09.2011 on experimental basis. During this period the shareholders will make their mutual arrangement for link watercourses.
(ii) The remodeling of old water course at RD 131135/R Rana Disty. will be kept in abeyance till 30.09.2011 and lining of new water course at RD 131575/R will also not be carried out till final decision.
(iii) The outlet at RD 131135/R will be kept closed when outlet at RD 131575/R is functioning.
(iv) Any shareholder can come to DCO, Hisar for review after 30.09.2011 if aggrieved.
Cost of any remodeling / arrangement of water courses will be deposited by farmers in advance before any such activity is carried out. Lining of new water course at RD 131575/R Rana Disty. would be carried out after 30.09.2011 CWP No. 935 of 2011 4 if it is confirmed."
It is specifically mentioned in this order dated 15.12.2010 that the shifting was being allowed for two crops only on experimental basis and opportunity has also been afforded to the shareholders to approach DCO for review after 30.09.2011. It is also mentioned that lining of the new watercourse at RD 131575/R, Rana Distributory would be carried out only after 30.09.2011, if it was confirmed. Since the order was for one year, the period has already expired on 30.09.2011, so, the present writ petition has become infructous.
In view of the above, the instant writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, if any order is subsequently passed and the petitioner feels aggrieved then he may approach the Divisional Canal Officer and file fresh writ petition, if so advised.
January 24, 2012 ( Paramjeet Singh ) vkd Judge