NIYAJ KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Leela Dhar Khatri, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner owns/possesses land, yet the respondents are not providing irrigation facilities to the petitioner in view of the litigation though he his having interim order in his favour.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has also contended that number of petitions involving identical grievance have been allowed by this Court vide judgment dated 25.01.2016 passed in a bunch of writ petitions led by SBCWP No (Gulsher Khan v. 5 State of Rajasthan and Ors.); which has been duly followed by another Coordinate Bench decision dated 24.10.2017 passed in & Ors.).

(3.) Mr. Manish Tak, learned counsel appearing for the respondents in principal agreed that the issue is broadly covered, he, however, apprehended that in guise of the judgment of this Court, the petitioner is seeking irrigation facilities to his land, even he is not in command area.