SADHU RAM Vs. SUPERINTENDING CANAL OFFICER, SIRSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a landowner holding land in village Goriawala, whereas respondent No. 4 is a tenant of the petitioner over 9 acres of land. The petitioner was given irrigation facilities in order to irrigate the land in his possession as well as in the possession of respondent No. 4 who was also given his share of water by the petitioner in proportion to the land that he was occupying. Respondent No. 4, however, moved an application before the Deputy Collector praying that a separate turn of water be given to him for the purpose of irrigating the nine acres of land comprising his tenancy. This application was allowed vide order dated 13.10.1978, Annexure P-1 to the petition. Aggrieved by the order the petitioner filed an appeal before the Divisional Canal Officer under Section 55(5) of the Haryana Canal and Drainage Act, 1974 (hereinafter called the 'Act'), but this too was dismissed vide order dated 31.1.1979. Annexure P-2 to the petition. The further revisitor taken before the Superintending Canal Officer was also dismissed vide Annexure P-3 dated 14.7.1980. The aforementioned annexures have been impugned in this petition.

(2.) The case as set out in the pleadings as also at the time of arguments addressed by Mr. P.N. Malkani, learned counsel for the petitioner was that as per the scheme of the Act no separate turn of water could be provided to a tenant on his application as there was no provision to that effect in the Act. He has also urged that the interest of the tenant was well protected under Section 11 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (hereinafter called the "1953 Act'), which reads as under :

(3.) In the reply the stand of the respondents is that section 55 of the Act entitled the tenant to claim a separate turn of water for the land held by him and, as such, the impugned orders were in accordance with law.