PUNJAB STATE Vs. PREM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only point involved to this second appeal is as to whether to decision of Superintending Engineer withdrawing the extra supply of water for the orchard of Prem Singh is in conformity with the provision of rule 12 of the Rules known as Rules for Extra Supply of Canal Water for Gardens and Orchards. Both the Courts below have held that the order is in contravention of provision of rule 12(a) of the Rules.

(2.) Shri Sethi appearing for the State of Punjab has raised two points; one that Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit in view of bar contained in section 68(7) of the Northern India Canal and Drainage Act, 1873 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), and the remedy of Prem Singh was to go up in appeal before the Divisional Canal Officer, against the order of Deputy Collector, as provided in section 68(5) of the Act and if still he was aggrieved, he could go up in revision under section 68(6) before the Superintending Canal Officer, and before the Civil Court the order passed under section 68 of the Act could not be called in question. The other point raised was that the impugned order was not contrary to the provision of Rule 12(a) of the Rules.

(3.) Adverting to the first point it is true that issue No. 3 was framed regarding the jurisdiction of Civil Court and decision of this issue went against the State before the trial Court. When the State failed in the trial Court it took the matter in appeal and before the Additional District Judge, the finding of the trial Court on issue No. 3 was not assailed and only finding on issue No. 1 alone was assailed. Hence 1 decline to go into this point. Moreover a look at the impugned order shows that it was passed by the Superintending Engineer, which has been counter-signed by the Executive Engineer and the Sub-Divisional Officer. Section 68 of the Act authorises only the Deputy Collector to pass an order and if anybody is aggrieved then appeal would lie to the Divisional Canal Officer and revision to the Superintending Canal Officer. Once the order is passed by the Superintending Engineer, there is no remedy left with Prem Singh under the Act. On this count also it cannot be said that the case was covered by section 68 of the Act and, therefore bar contained in sub-section (7) of section 68 of the Act would not apply. If the case was to be brought under section 68 of the Act then the impugned order would be without jurisdiction because it is not passed by the Deputy Collector.