Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jagraj Singh & Ors. vs . State Of Rajasthan & Ors. on 24 April, 2015
Author: Sangeet Lodha
Bench: Sangeet Lodha
1
JAGRAJ SINGH & ORS. VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.
(S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10064/11)
Dated:- 24.4.15.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA
Mr.B.S.Sandhu, for the petitioners.
Mr.S.M.Toshniwal, Additional Government Counsel. Mr.H.S.Sidhu, for respondent no.4.
1. This writ petition is directed against order dated 22.9.11 passed by the Superintending Engineer, Water Resources Circle, Sri Ganganagar, affirming the order dated 1.8.11 passed by the Executive Engineer, Water Resources (North Division), Sri Ganganagar, whereby an additional Naka has been sanctioned at Kila no.21 for irrigating the land ad measuring 12.10 bighas comprising khasra no.44 belonging to fourth respondent herein.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the land of the fourth respondent was being properly irrigated for all these years from Naka at Kila No.25 and therefore, there was no occasion for sanctioning an additional Naka at Kila No.21. Learned counsel submitted that even as per the technical report, the agriculture field of the fourth respondent is being properly irrigated and thus, the finding arrived at by the Executive Engineer, affirmed by the Appellate Authority, the Superintending Engineer, is ex facie contrary to record and perverse.
3. On the other hand, the counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the order impugned has been passed by the Executive Engineer after due consideration of all the relevant aspects including 2 FKL Report and the concurrent finding arrived at by both the authorities, does not warrant any interference by this court in exercise of its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
4. It is to be noticed that the land of the fourth respondent is situated towards Kila no.21 and the water flows from Kila No.21 to Kila No.25 and thereafter, the land of fourth respondent was being irrigated by reverse flow of water from Kila No.25 to 21 and thus, taking into consideration the technical feasibility, the Executive Engineer found that so as to extend proper irrigation facility to the land of the fourth respondent, it is necessary to sanction additional Naka at Kila no.21. Obviously, this court has no technical expertise in the matter and there is absolutely nothing on record suggesting that the concurrent finding arrived at by both the authorities taking into consideration the technical aspects of the matter, in favour of sanctioning an additional Naka at Kila no.21, is capricious or perverse.
5. In this view of the matter, no case for interference by this court in exercise of its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is made out.
6. The writ petition is therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs.
(SANGEET LODHA),J.
Aditya/