Disposed of a writ petition regarding water supply issues and closure of a irrigation canal (naka). The Court held that no further adjudication was needed as the respondent undertook to use only one naka, which was already in use.
Directed the respondent No. 4 to abide by the undertaking to use only one naka.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17580/2018
Sohan Lal S/o Shri Bhaktawar Ram, Aged About 50 Years, Chak 7 Uts, Tehsil Hanumangarh, District Hanumangarh (Raj)
----Petitioner
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. J.S. Bhaleria |
|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : Ms. Abhilasha Kumbhat, AGC Mr. N.R. Budania |
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
08/12/2021
This Court had passed the following order on 15.12.2018:
“Heard on application for vacating the interim order dated 14.11.2018.
Counsel for the respondent No.4 submitted that in compliance of the interim order dated 14.11.2018, the respondent No.3 has closed the naka sanctioned by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 23.10.2018. Counsel further submits that the earlier sanctioned naka was already closed and in compliance of the order passed by this Court, additional naka has also been closed by the departmental authorities, therefore, today, the water supply facility to the fields of the petitioner has
(2 of 2)
[CW-17580/2018]
been closed by the respondents and the petitioner is facing great difficulty regarding water supply to his crops. In support of his contention, counsel for respondent No.4 has relied upon a report of the President, Water Users Association BK-30 issued on 29.11.2018. A copy of the report dated 29.11.2018 is taken on record.
Considering the submissions made by counsel for the respondent No.4 and also considering the report submitted by the President, Water Users Association dated 29.11.2018, I deem it just and proper to vacate the interim order dated 14.11.2018. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents No.1 & 3 – State is directed to submit a report regarding closure of old naka by the department. Counsel for the respondent No.4 undertakes to use only one naka.
List this writ petition on 29.01.2019.”
In view of the undertaking given by learned counsel for the respondent No.4 that there shall be only one naka i.e. additional naka, the petition no longer requires adjudication. Moreover, the State has also filed a report that additional naka is working, which is the only naka. The said report is taken on record.
Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent No.4 to abide by the aforesaid undertaking.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.
146-Zeeshan
Sohan Lal
State Of Rajasthan
The Superintending Engineer, Water Resources
The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division
Manphool
Dr. Pusphendra Singh Bhati
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
