IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.15535 of 1989 (O&M) Date of decision: 18.03.2011 Nihal Singh and others ....Petitioners versus Gokal and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Ashok Verma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Satbir Singh Goripuria, DAG, Haryana. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? No. ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) The petitioners challenge the order of the Divisional Canal Officer (DCO) issuing a draft scheme under Section 18(1) of the Haryana Canal and Drainage Rule shifting the head of outlet from R.D.129643-R back to R.D.119600-R . The challenge was mounted by the petitioners on the ground that on their earlier application, the outlet had been shifted from R.D.129643-R to R.D.120963-R. This shifting was challenged by the private respondents before the DCO. It was dismissed and in all the subsequent proceedings in the hierarchy, the first order was maintained. A challenge to the same was made before the Civil Court and the Civil Court had also upheld the petitioners' right to have a outlet Civil Writ Petition No.15535 of 1989 (O&M) - 2 - at R.D.120963-R. The challenge now by the petitioners is on the ground that after the earlier orders upholding the petitioners' claim and the Civil Court decree, the impugned order could not have been passed in derogation of the rights secured through the earlier order. The private respondents have not appeared to challenge the petitioners' contention. I uphold the petitioners' plea and quash the impugned proceedings issued by the Divisional Canal Officer issuing a draft scheme under Section 18 (1) of the above said rule. The writ petition is allowed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 18.03.2011 sanjeev