SHIV SHANKAR PUROHIT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking the following prayer :-

(2.) At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was allotted land measuring about 31 bighas in Chak No. 1 ALM. Thereafter part of land was transferred for irrigation to Chak No. 4 BGM(A) and out of this land, 6 bighas is being irrigated and rest of the land is not being irrigated. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to closure of nursery of forest department, the water which was supplied to nursery became excess and the same was distributed between the agriculturists of Chak No. 4 BGM(A) but the petitioner did not get his share.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the nursery of forest department was closed and the excess water was conditionally distributed amongst the surrounding farmers but that was only subject to restarting of nursery and if the nursery was to restart, the water was to be withdrawn. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that this was part time arrangement and the petitioner's 6 bighas of command land was also included in such distribution. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, submits that since excess water has been admitted by the respondents in the record, which is Annexures-1 and 2, the petitioner needs to be given equitable distribution of such excess water as a consequence of Nursery water being stopped.