ANGREJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on 1. 10. 2003 against the respondents with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned order dtd. 12. 12. 2002 (Annex. 1) passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer (respondent No. 3) by which the Divisional Irrigation Officer (respondent No. 3) transferred the land situated in Square No. 30 and 31 in Chak 5-CC to Chak-6 NNN and the appellate-judgment dtd. 28. 4. 2003 (Annex. 2) passed by the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle (respondent No. 2) by which the case was remanded to the Divisional Irrigation Officer (respondent No. 3) and the order dtd. 27. 5. 2003 (Annex. 3-A) passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer (respondent No. 3) by which the Divisional Irrigation Officer remanded the case back to the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle (respondent No. 2) and the appellant judgment dtd. 22. 8. 2003 (Annex. 6) by which the Superintending Engineer (respondent No. 2) has affirmed the order dtd. 12. 12. 2002 (Annex. 1) passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer (respondent No. 3) be quashed and set aside.

(2.) THE facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under: i) That agricultural land of the petitioners is situated in Chak-6nn, Tehsil Padampur and irrigation is being done through the outlet of Chak 6 NN. THE agricultural land of non-petitioners No. 4 to 6 is situated in Chak-5cc, Tehsil Padampur, Distt. Sri Ganganagar and they were getting the water facility through the outlet of Chak-5cc. ii) That the non-petitioners No. 4 to 6 filed an application before the Divisional Irrigation Officer, Gangnahar, North Division, Sri Ganganagar (respondent No. 3) to transfer their land in Square No. 30 and 31 in Chak 5-CC to Chak 6 NNN mainly on the ground that their land is at about 15 square away from the head of Chak-5cc, so they were not getting the proper irrigation from Chak-5cc. iii) That further case of the petitioners is the Divisional Irrigation Officer (respondent No. 3) without adopting the proper procedure and without giving the proper opportunity of hearing and without examining the law in this regard vide order dtd. 12. 12. 2002 (Annex. 1) transferred the land in question from Chak- 5cc to Chak 6 NN and also sanctioned some new water course and nakas without adopting the proper procedure as provided under the Rajasthan Irrigation and Dainage Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1954 ). iv) Further case of the petitioners is that aggrieved from the order dtd. 12. 12. 2002 (Annex. 1), the petitioners filed an appeal before the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Sri Ganganagar (respondent No. 2) who also without adopting the proper procedure and without examining the legal procedure and without giving a proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioners vide appellate judgment dtd. 28. 4. 2003 (Annex. 2) remanded the case back to the Divisional Irrigation Officer with the directions that the case be put before the Chief Engineer, Irrigation, Hanumangarh Junction with the detailed technical reports as for the proposed transfer of the agricultural land from one system to another system neither the Divisional Irrigation Officer (respondent No. 3) nor the Superintending Engineer (respondent No. 2) are competent to make such transfer. v) Further case of the petitioners is that against the appellate judgment dtd. 28. 4. 2003 (Annex. 2), one of the petitioners Hardayal Singh filed a writ petition being S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2703/2003 before this Court which was disposed of by this Court vide order dtd. 11. 6. 2003 with the observations that since the case has been remanded back to the Divisional Irrigation Officer (respondent No. 3) and Superintending Engineer (respondent No. 2) for putting it before the Chief Engineer, Irrigation (North (respondent No. 1), the same did not require any interference and the petitioners will be at liberty to raise these objections before the Chief Engineer (respondent No. 1 ). vi) Further case of the petitioners is that in pursuance of the appellate judgment dtd. 28. 4. 2003 (Annex. 2) passed by the Superintending Engineer (respondent No. 2), the Divisional Irrigation Officer (respondent No. 3) submitted the case back to the Superintending Engineer (respondent No. 2) without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner vide order dtd. 27. 5. 2003 (Annex. 3-A ). vii) Further case of the petitioners is that the Superintending Engineer (respondent No. 2) forwarded the matter to the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Hanumangarh Junction (respondent No. 1) on 2. 6. 2003 for passing the proper order. viii) Further case of the petitioners is that the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Hanumangarh Junction (respondent No. 1) without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, remitted the case back to the Superintending Engineer (respondent No. 2) vide order dtd. 9. 7. 2003 (Annex. 4 ). ix) Further case of the petitioners is that on receipt of the case file by the Superintending Engineer (respondent No. 2), the Superintending Engineer without issuing the notices and without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners No. 1 to 10 passed a stereo-typed appellate judgment dtd. 22. 8. 2003 (Annex. 6) and affirmed the order dtd. 12. 12. 2002 (Annex. 1) passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer (respondent No. 3) after hearing only caveator Hardayal Singh (one of the petitioners), whereas the petitioners No. 1 to 10 were also most affected persons by this transfer of agricultural land to Chak 6 NN as they were also shareholders of Chak-6nn and their irrigation facility would be badly affected by inclusion of 50 bighas of land in Chak 6 NNN because the original appeal (Annex. 5) was filed by the petitioners No. 1 to 10 along with the petitioner Hardayal Singh. Hence, this writ petition with the abovementioned prayer.

(3.) HEARD and perused the record.