VIRSA SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing order Annexure P-5 dated 23.07.2009 passed by Superintending Canal Officer, Hisar whereby, revision petition filed by respondent No. 3 has been accepted and order of Divisional Canal Officer Annexure P-4 has been set aside.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that the petitioner claims that watercourse A B C D and E F has been in existence for 40 years. Warabandi has been sanctioned since the year 1964. The respondent No. 3 purchased land from Hemraj son of Ditta Ram and Sunil son of Hem Raj in the year 2007. For their own personal convenience, the watercourse at the said points has been demolished. Accordingly, the petitioner filed an application tinder Section 24 of the Haryana Canal and Drainage Act, 1974 (for short 'The Act') praying for restoration of the watercourse that had been demolished by respondent No. 3. Facts further indicate that vide order Annexure P-1 passed by Sub Divisional Canal Officer, Ghaggar Water Services, Tohana, it has been directed that watercourse A B C D and E F be restored. A positive finding has been returned that the said watercourse had been dismantled and irrigation to the land of the petitioner had been stopped.

(3.) THE respondent filed a revision petition before the Superintending Canal Officer purportedly under Section 2 of the Act. Vide order Annexure P-3, the Superintending Canal Officer remanded the matter back to Divisional Canal Officer to reconsider the matter in the light of present irrigation of the area. It has been observed that there were 6 shareholders of the watercourse, however, the others had not come forward to challenge the action of the respondents in dismantling the watercourse and, therefore, investigation is required.