NARAIN SINGH Vs. SUPERINTENDING IRRIGATION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition raises a question relating to the interpretation of Section 53 of the Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Act, 1954 (herein after referred to as 'the Act' ). The facts which give rise to the present writ petition are few and simple. The petitioners as well as the respondents No. 4 to 30 are agriculturists owing agricultural land situated in Chak 3b in Tehsil Sri Ganganagar and they were irrigating their fields according to turns fixed by common consent. THIS system is known as 'panchayati Bari'. However, as disputes arose between the parties, the petitioners submitted an application to the Divisional Irrigation Officer, Gang Canal, North Division, Sri Ganganagar requesting him to resolve the dispute by fixing the turns of all persons in Chak 3b regarding the supply of water from the common water-course. The Divisional Irrigation Officer by his order dated October 17, 1973 directed that 'gili Sukhi Khatewar Bari' would govern the distribution of water to the parties in Chak No. 3b till the end of the Rabi crop of the year 1973-74, which was standing at that time and further directed that 'gili Sukhi Nakewar Bari' be introduced from the beginning of the Kharif crop of 1974 i. e. from April 15, 1974. The respondents No. 4 to 30 filed an appeal against the aforesaid order passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer before the Superintending Irrigation Officer, Bikaer Irrigation Circle, Sri Ganganagar, who allowed the appeal by his order dated December 14, 1973 and modified the order passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer to the effect that 'gili Sukhi Khatewar Bari' be introduced with effect from April 15, 1974 instead of 'gili Sukhi Nakewar Bari'.

(2.) THE petitioner's contend that an appeal was not maintainable before the Superintending Irrigation Officer against the order passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer dated October 17, 1973 and that the Superintending Irrigation Officer had no jurisdiction to interfere with the aforesaid order passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer. On the other hand, the respondents contest this position and their contention is that an appeal before the Superintending Irrigation Officer was maintainable under Rule 55 of the Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Rules, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' ).

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner argues that under Rule 56 the Limitation for filing an appeal was 30 days from the date of the order appealed from and as such if the appeal is to be filed against the order passed by the Divisonal Irrigation Officer under Sec. 53 (1) of the Act after the removal of the growing crop, then such appeal may not be within the limitation prescribed under Rule 56 and on that basis he submits but the provisions of Rule 55 should not be held to be applicable to an order passed under Section 53 (1) by the Divisional Irrigation Officer. It is not possible to accept this contention of the learned counsel, inasmuch as an appeal against an order passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer under Sec. 53 (1) of the Act may be filed in accordance with the provisions of Rule 55, within the period of 30 days from the date of passing of the said order, as prescribed under Rule 56, yet the order that may be passed by the Superintending Irrigation Officer upon such appeal would not affect the distribution of water in respect of the crop sown or growing at the time when the Divisional Irrigation Officer passed his order. Thus the order that the Superintending Irrigation Officer may pass on appeal under Rule 55 would be given effect to after the removal of the crop growing at the time when the order of the Divisional Irrigation Officer is passed.