AMAN KUMAR Vs. SUPERINTENDING CANAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in this application is for preponement of the hearing of the main writ petition which stands adjourned for 13.08.2019. Prayer made in the application is accepted. The hearing of the main writ petition is preponed from 13.08.2019 and the same is taken on Board. Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 14.08.2012 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Sub-Divisional Canal Officer, Dhamtan Water Services Sub-Division Narwana, District Jind, whereby the application for restoration of the watercourse filed by respondents No. 4 to 8, which, according to them, has been dismantled by the petitioner, was allowed, against which appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed by 1 of 5 the Divisional Canal Officer, Tohana Water Services Division, Tohana, District Fatehabad-respondent No. 2 vide order dated 14.06.2018 (Annexure P-7) and the revision thereafter preferred by the petitioner has also been dismissed by the Superintending Canal Officer, Bhakra Water Services Circle, Fatehabad, District Fatehahad-respondent No. 1 vide order dated 29.05.2019 (Annexure P-8).

(2.) It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was and there is no khal which is alleged to have been dismantled by the petitioner. He contends that as a matter of fact, the khal, which was provided for during the consolidation proceedings, has been encroached upon by the private respondents, against which the proceedings were initiated by the Gram Panchayat, wherein it was concluded that because of dismantling of the watercourse, which was lying as per the consolidation, the land of the Gram Panchayat was being deprived of irrigation. His further contention is that the authorities have failed to consider the fact that in the absence of a watercourse, there is no question of dismantling of the same by the petitioner. Reference has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner to the order dated 14.06.2018 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Divisional Canal Officer, Tohana Water Services Division, Tohana, District Fatehabad-respondent No. 2, wherein it has been stated that there is an admission that some of the share holders, on whose demand the watercourse in dispute was ordered to be restored at the site, are supplying water through their fields to another lined watercourse whereas the Panchayat land is being deprived of the water. He, thus, contends that the impugned orders cannot sustain and deserve to be set aside. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel 2 of 5 for the petitioner and with his assistance, have gone through the records of the case.

(3.) An application for restoration of the watercourse was moved by the private respondents on the plea that the petitioner had dismantled the watercourse, because of which, they would be deprived of proper irrigation at the site. The said application, after due consideration, was allowed by the Sub-Divisional Canal Officer and while taking a decision, he had stated that while inspecting the spot on 11.08.2012 and on perusal of the record produced by Ziledar Kharal and Halqa Patwari, the watercourse at point AB has been found to be dismantled on the spot and found lined watercourse in the middle of Murba No. 54 killa No. 17-18 and Murba No. 55 killa No. 25. It was further observed that the irrigation to the land of the applicants was stopped due to dismantling of watercourse in the middle of killa No. 19-20 and 21-22. Reference has also been made to the scheme of lining the watercourse at Murba No. 54// Killa No. 17-18-19-20/24-23-22-21 and Murba No. 54 Killa No. 20/ Murba No. 55 Killa No. 16 and Murba No. 55 Killa No. 16 due to running of the watercourse. Warabandi details have also been mentioned. This is the report based upon the site inspection and records.