The petitioner challenged orders directing him to restore a demolished Khal. The court rejected the plea that specific points were ready because the watercourse was too long for proper irrigation and a Zildar's report confirmed the watercourse was running at the dismantled spot.
Writ petition dismissed with no merit found.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No.17691 of 2006 Date of decision: November 09, 2006
Niranjan Singh
.........Petitioner
Versus
Supdt. Canal Officer and Ors
..........Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NIRMAL YADAV
Present: Mr. Surinder Garg, Advocate for the petitioner
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J (Oral)
The petitioner is aggrieved by the orders dated 16.03.2005 and 15.04.2005 (Annexures P-1 and P-2), passed by the Divisional Canal Officer and Superintending Canal Officer, Ludhiana, respectively, by which the petitioner has been directed to restore the demolished Khal 'GH'.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to give the Khal from points 'A' to 'H'.
We have perused the site plan, annexed with the petition as Annexure P-4, and on perusal of the same, find that the water course from points 'A' to 'H' is very long and, would not be suitable for the proper irrigation to the fields of respondent No.4.
Apart from above, the report was sought from the Ziledar, who opined that the watercourse ' GH' was running at the spot, which has been dismantled by the petitioner.
In view of the above, we find no merit in the writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.
( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE
November 09, 2006 mohan
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking restoration of the demoltioned Khal GH deserves to be allowed.
Niranjan Singh
Supdt. Canal Officer
Ors
Ashutosh Mohanta
Nirmal Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
