HARBANS SINGH HARNAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Letters Patent appeal is directed against the order, dated the 7th January, 1965 of a learned Singh Judge of this Court whereby he dismissed the appellants civil writ petition under Arts. 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) IT has been placed before the Full Bench on account of the submission by MR. H. R. Sodhi learned counsel for the appellants that there was conflict of opinion between two Division Benches of our Court. These are Chanan Singh v. State of punjab (Civil Writ No. 262 of 1961) reported in 65 Pun L R 732, and unreported judgment in Bhagat Singh v. State of Punjab Civil Writ No. 1461 of 1963 D/- 25-51964 (Punj ).

(3.) THE appellants are some of the land-owners in village of Laroya, Sagranwali and Tandi Tehsil and District Julundur. It is alleged in the petition that there is a stream or Cho coming from Hoshiarpur District and passing through the districts of jullundur and Gurdaspur. It is known Mangrowal Cho. The canal authorities plainned to dig out a drain for carrying away the water flowing in this Cho and initially the alignment of this drain was towards the western side of villages Tandi and Sagranwali and the drain did not pass through village Laroya. the land through which this alignment was proposed was mostly Barani and some of it was unfit for cultivation. The canal authorities had not prepared any drainage scheme as required by the Northern India Canal and Drainage Act 1873 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act ). But as the land of the appellants remained indifferent. However certain persons owning the land affected by the alignment approached the higher authorities and managed to drain was to pass through the land of the appellants. No scheme as envisaged by section 57 of the Act was framed relating to the construction of this drain and the appellants were not given an opportunity to raise objections to the new proposal. It was said that the whole procedure adopted was arbitrary and illegal that no land of the appellants could be taken except on payment of proper compensation and that the State Government if it intended to acquire any part of the land was bound to take action under the Land acquisition Act as well. At the instances of the appellants the Executive Engineer stayed the digging operation till the 31st July, 1963, to enable them to bring a stay order. The petition was instituted on the 31st July 1963. It was admitted the next day and an interim stay of digging operation on the appellants land was granted.