JARNAIL SINGH Vs. SUPERINTENDING CANAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only grievance of the petitioners in the present case is that a watercourse is being constructed through their fields without acquisition of the land and payment of compensation in accordance with Section 30-D of the Northern India (Canal and Drainage) Act, 1873. The State of Punjab has filed a written statement wherein it is said that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 had given land for the land of the petitioners coming under watercourse 'AB' to them and therefore, the question of compensation did not arise. It is further said that if the petitioners were not given any land in lieu of their land, they were entitled to proper compensation. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have not filed any written statement.

(2.) The sole question that arises for determination is whether the watercourse can be constructed through the land of the petitioners without its acquisition by the State. Section 30-D of the Act specifically provides that if a watercourse is constructed through the land of any person, the same shall be acquired and the owner shall be paid compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. Even the State has not denied that the petitioners are not entitled to the compensation. It is, however, pleaded that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have given some land to the petitioners. The details of the land which is alleged to have been given to them have not been mentioned in the written statement. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, who are alleged to have given the land, have not filed any return. No land could be transferred by respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to the petitioners except by a registered document. No registered document has been produced by the State that some land had been given to them in lieu of the land which is being taken for constructing a watercourse. In the circumstances, it cannot be held that any land had been given to the petitioners in lieu of the land taken from them. In this situation, the construction of a watercourse by the State through the land of the petitioners is illegal, unless it is acquired in accordance with the provisions of Section 30-D of the Act.

(3.) For the aforesaid reasons, I accept the writ petition and direct the respondents not to construct the watercourse till the land of the petitioners is acquired and compensation paid.