JAGGAR SINGH Vs. SUPERINTENDING CANAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING dissatisfied by the dismissal of the writ petition, Jaggar Singh has filed this appeal under Clause X of the Letter Patent and has prayed that the order of the learned Single Judge be set aside and the writ petition filed by him be accepted.

(2.) IT is not necessary to set out the facts in detail because they have been extensively taken note of by the Superintending Canal Officer while deciding the revision petition filed by Mit Singh and Bagga Singh. The learned Single Judge has also taken note of some of the facts which have got bearing on the question whether the order passed by the Superintending Canal Officer suffers from an error of law apparent on the face of the record requiring High Court's interference in exercise of its certiorari jurisdiction.

(3.) WHAT has happened in the present case is that on an application filed by Khilu Singh, proceedings were initiated for warabandi of water course. The Deputy Collector disposed of the application by an order dated 3. 11. 1977 on the basis of some compromise arrived at between the applicant and the contesting parties. Mit Singh and Bagga Singh felt aggrieved by the arrangement made by the Deputy Collector and they filed appeal before the Divisional Canal Officer, Bhatinda who upheld the order passed by the Deputy Collector. The Superintending Canal Officer before whom revision petition was filed by Mit Singh and Bagga Singh modified the order of the Divisional Canal Officer. However, on a writ petition filed by Jaggar Singh (CWP 3993 of 1978), this court quashed the order dated 10. 7. 1978 passed by the Superintending Canal Officer and remitted the matter back to the said authority for fresh decision. After hearing the parties, the Superintending Canal Officer passed the impugned order dated 18. 8. 1979 and issued the following direction: