CWP No.13290 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.13290 of 2007 Date of Decision: 18.1.2010 Maheshinder Singh .....Petitioner Vs. Superintending Canal Officer and others ....Respondents .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA **** Present : Mr.S.P.S. Tinna, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Yatinder Sharma, DAG, Punjab, for respondents no.1 and 2. .... RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral) Prayer in this petition is to set aside orders dated 13.2.2003 and 27.12.2006, passed by the Divisional Canal Officer,Abohar Canal Division, Abohar and the Superintending Canal Officer, Ferozepur Canal Circle, Ferozepur, respectively. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner did not receive any notice of the date fixed for the hearing of his appeal, before the Superintending Canal Officer. The Superintending Canal Officer fixed the appeal on 27.12.2006 and on that date, decided the appeal. It is further submitted that after the decision of the appeal, the petitioner filed a representation on 8.5.2007, praying that an opportunity of hearing be granted to him. However, no orders were passed on this application. Despite service, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the private respondent. It appears that the private respondent is not interested in CWP No.13290 of 2007 2 opposing the petition. Counsel for the State of Punjab, submits that a notice was issued, requiring the petitioner to appear before the Superintending Canal Officer in support of his appeal, but as the petitioner did not come forward, the Superintending Canal Officer had no option, but to decide the appeal. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned orders. The petitioner may have been remiss in his obligation to pursue his appeal before the Superintending Canal Officer, but this alone could not deprive him of his right to a hearing. An opportunity of hearing is fundamental to the system of administration of justice equally applicable to quasi judicial authorities. The grant of hearing is all the more significant, as it has been ordered that the petitioner's land would not be provided any irrigation from the canal. If the petitioner failed to appear on the first date, the Superintending Canal Officer could have granted another opportunity. As a consequence, this petition is allowed and the order dated 27.12.2006, passed by the Superintending Canal Officer, Ferozepur Canal Circle, Ferozepur, is set aside and the appeal is restored to his office, to be decided afresh, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Parties are directed to appear before the Superintending Canal Officer on 16.2.2010. 18.1.2010 (RAJIVE BHALLA) GS JUDGE