(1.) With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard and decided today itself.
(2.) The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking the following prayer:-
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's agriculture land measuring 30 bighas is situated in Chak 7 AMP in the irrigation record and Chak 15 BJP as per revenue record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the legal position is that as per standing order No. 15 dtd. 1/2/1974, the benefit of Nikal is to be given to the land situated at the tail of the main water course. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per standing order No. 15, the benefit of Nikal is to be given to the longest branch of the water course and since the petitioner is at tail, therefore, the benefit of Nikal is to be given to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondent No. 4 has enjoyed the Nikal for the last so many years and since in the light of present standing order, the petitioner himself was to be given the benefit of Nikal and, therefore, he moved appropriate application before the Executive Engineer and an order was passed in his favour on 24/8/2018 in which it was held that since the petitioner was at tail, therefore, the benefit of Nikal be given to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the order dtd. 28/4/2018 was challenged by the respondent No. 4 by filing appeal before the Superintending Engineer which was allowed by order dtd. 18/10/2018. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also shown this Court the report Annex.P/3 as per which the respondent No. 4's land is not at the tail of the water course as it is blocked and thus, by no means of factual matrix, the respondent No. 4 can be said to be at the tail. Learned counsel for the petitioner thus submits that the impugned order of the Superintending Engineer is unlawful as it is contrary to the standing order.