JASVINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the outset, counsel for the respondent submits that if impugned orders dtd. 7/2/2012 (Annex.6) and 15/7/2013 (Annex.8) are implemented, then no prejudice is going to be caused to the petitioner as his water supply shall not be affected by implementation of such orders. Counsel for the respondent has relied upon the judgment of this Court in Hakam Singh v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. [Civil Writ (CW) No. 5059 of 2010, decided on 19/8/2016], relevant portion whereof is read as follows:-

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that if no prejudice is going to be caused to him in terms of volume of water supplied, then he shall not press for quashing of the impugned orders, however, he seeks liberty to challenge those impugned orders again in case any prejudice is caused to him.

(3.) In light of limited submission the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to maintain the assurance given by Government Counsel Ms. Abhilasha Bora that the volume of water as well as time period for which water is being supplied to the petitioner shall not be affected while implementing the orders in-question. However, in case the petitioner feels that after the orders in-question are executed and he has any grievance, then the petitioner shall be free to approach this Court again.