Satbir Singh And Another v. Divisional Canal Officer And Others

2024:PHHC:046543 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.13785 of 2020 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.04.2024 Satbir Singh and another ..... Petitioners

Versus

Divisional Canal Officer, Adampur Water Services Division Hisar and others ..... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ ***

Present:

None for the petitioners.

Mr. Narinder Singh Behgal, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Sunil Kumar Nehra, Advocate for respondent No.3.

*** RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL) Present writ petition has been filed for setting aside the impugned orders dated 20.01.2020 (Annexure P-2) and 11.08.2020 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Sub Divisional Canal Officer, Badopal Water Services Sub Divisional Hisar, and Divisional Canal Officer, Adampur Water Services Division Hisar, being wrong, illegal, not speaking and contrary to the provisions of Section 24(2) of the Haryana Canal and Drainage Act, 1974.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 has submitted that water course of the petitioner has already been restored on 31.01.2024.

RITTU 2024.04.05 16:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP No.13785 of 2020 (O&M) -2- 2024:PHHC:046543 Learned State counsel on instructions has drawn the attention of this Court to Annexure R-1 appended with the reply filed by respondent No.1 & 2 wherein it has been stated that the water course has been got restored at site in the peaceful manner and the order has been complied with in peaceful manner. Further on the spot, in the presence of the Duty Magistrate and with the police help including women police, the water course has been got restored and in this manner, the entire process has been completed while maintaining peace.

He has thus submitted that grievances of the petitioners have already been redressed and hence, nothing survives in the present petition for adjudication.

Heard.

On hearing learned counsel for respondent No.3 as well as learned State counsel, it is apparent that grievances of the petitioners have been redressed as is evident from Annexure R-1 appended with the reply filed by respondents No.1 & 2.

In view of the above position, the present petition is disposed of as infructuous. However the petitioners would be at liberty to pursue their remedies in accordance with law in case any further cause of action accrues to them.

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) JUDGE 05.04.2024 rittu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No RITTU 2024.04.05 16:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document