Sukhdev Singh And Others v. Supdt Canal Officer And Others
!
"
#
#
#
"
$%$&$'
( )*%+
,-.*,/ 01
#
2 3
4--567/8 73 #
2 3 4%$%167 /8 73 -
$%$&$ '
( )*%+
-$$-$ 9
$1$
&$
$%$&$
# %
"
$%$&$ '
( )*%+
#"
,$'
( )*,+
#
5 ,$0$-
!
"
#
: &$0$-
" (
;* <
! " # $ %
&'($ )
! $ %*+*,'() ) -
! !
. /
0
,% -
- . /
/
.
= ,
# "
23.08.2023 (Annexure P-8), allowed the prayer of private respondents and permitted the transfer of 7.91 acres of area from Outlet Burji No.133252/R Malukpur Rajbah to Outlet Burji No.140429/R Malukpur Rajbah, by observing as under:- "
- x - x - Decision dated 23.08.2023" The case was examined. The parties who came present in the court were heard. The decision of the Divisional Canal Officer, Abohar Canal Division, dated 04.08.2022 was seen. The undersigned carried out the spot inspection on 18.08.2023 in the presence of the concerned parties. From the spot inspection it has been found that the area of the applicants falls quite in the beginning of the proposed Outlet and due to this, there shall be better irrigation of the area. Therefore keeping the better irrigation in view, the demand of the applicants is accepted under Section 30-B(2) of the Northern India Canal & Drainage Act 8-1873 Amended 23 of 1965 meaning thereby 7.91 acres area is excluded from Outlet Burji No.133252/R Malukpur Rajbah and the same is included in Outlet No.140429/R Malukpur Rajbah.
The arrangement of the watercourse shall be made by the applicants themselves. They shall be made bound to adhere to the conditions of the Canal Department.
any change (which he may consider appropriate)." 0
-$&$- '
( )*&+
# "
1$%$%'
( )*$+ "
;* <> 1
2
-
3 4 ! -2.
. 024 $
5,&'%56
7
717 $ 7 8 7
(7
2 7
./ 4
% %% +
3 4!
0 - 3 4 ! - 2. .
.
- . 7.
! 9 ': 1
;
<
!
! - #
;
< 3 4 !
7 .
/ 1
1 /.
. .
./
,% .
/
1 1
.
- '
#
7
+";
< $
0 4=3 2
5%5
#.2 2 %,&
3 4 ! - 2.
+5 + > = - ?
"
'+
"
% @
"
'+?
"
(
?
"
"
-$* -$* 4 ? A!
&0- ' B &0-
C+
"
?
"
" "
$$
(
8?
'+
5 ,
"
-$* -$*
&0-
3
$1$
4 -
40
3
#
"
$%$&$'
( )*%+ "
! #
0 ?
#
:?
"
-$* -$* &0-
& 9 # # "
"
" #
?
'01
+
" "
"
!
1 @
$
#
3
01
"
In Mohinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2012(67) RCR (Civil) 760; a Division Bench of this Court observed as under:- "...We are of the opinion that the matter of transfer of an area from one outlet to another by the canal authorities should be seldom interfered with in the writ jurisdiction, particularly when the canal authorities had taken the decision after hearing the interested parties and in the interest of better irrigation, and also considering that while making such transfer, the maximum land will be properly irrigated..."
12.
Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, once the procedural requirements have been complied with and the canal authorities, upon consideration of the matter and having examined all technical aspects, have concluded that shifting of area would be in the interest of better irrigation; it would not be in the fitness of things for this Court to substitute the said conclusion. Furthermore, it has not been pointed out as to how the impugned orders are patently illegal or arbitrary. 13.
In view of the above discussion, there is no error in the impugned order(s) passed by the canal authorities, which may call for any interference by this Court in this writ petition, and hence, the same is hereby dismissed.
14.
All the pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed.
2 1 E
6 ;
64 E
;
64