IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12496 of 2010 RAJ KUMAR MISHRA s/o Shri Shyam Nath Mishra, resident of village- Bichhiyaon P.S.- Dinara, District- Rohtas. ------------------Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary,Irrigation Department, Patna. 2. The District Magistrate, Rohtas. 3. The Chief Engineer, Water Resource Department, Dehri, Rohtas. 4.The Superintendent Engineer, Flood Control, Buxar Circle, Buxar. 5. The Executive Engineer, Sone Canal Division, Buxar. 6.The Sub Divisional Officer, Sone Canel Sub Division, sikraul, Buxar. 7. The Junior Engineer, Section- Gaura Sone Canel Sub Division, sikraul, Buxar. 8. The Anchal Adhikari, Block Dinara, District- Rohtas. 9. The Superintendent of Police, Rohtas. ----------- Respondents ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. K.N. Choubey, Sr. Adv. and M/s Ambuj Nayan Choubey, Ashok Kumar Garg, Siddhartha Harsh , Yogendra Kumar Dwivedi and Prabhat Bhardwaj. For the State : Mr. Mani Kant Mishra, G.P. 25 and Mr. Kinkar Kumar, A.C. to G.P. 25. 8 21.6.2011 It appears that the present case is not so much of problem with regard to a dispute in fact but more with regard to the authority, who would be competent to resolve the disputes which arise. There are two contiguous villages, namely, Bhadasara and Bichhiyaon in Dinara block of Rohtas district. There are differences between the villagers of two villages in relation to irrigation through the public irrigation canal / branch canal/ distributary/sub distributary . The petitioners are of village Bichhiyaon, which is upstream in the irrigation system and private respondents are of village Bhadasara, which is down 2 stream. Both villages fall under Bhandasra Gram Panchayat. The petitioners complain that the residents of village Bhadasara taking advantage of their dominant position breach embankment to drain out the water for irrigation and block irrigation channel ( sub distributary to petitioner’s village). No authority is taking effective steps for equitable distribution of water for irrigation amongst the two villages . This gives rise to serious repeated law and order problem. District administration and police have filed counter affidavits alleging that the petitioners are causing obstructions to flow of water to the village of private respondents. Reply has also been filed by the petitioners stating that the authorities are not resolving the dispute but taking un- co-operative attitude only because the Mukhiya of the Gram Panchayat belongs to the village of private respondents, who are down stream. These are the issues , which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in this summary jurisdiction but in view of the grievance, as made, there is a question of dispute regard to sharing and utilizing water for irrigation purpose. There must exist an agency to resolve such dispute with authoritatively . Mr. K.N. Choubey, learned Senior Counsel in support of the Writ petition submits that this Court should direct appropriate authority to work in this direction. Heard the parties. In my view there are ample statutory provisions, which can be resorted to in nature of this dispute. Firstly, I may note that the two villages are concerned, 3 are under the same very Gram Panchayat, namely, Bhandasra. That being so, in view of Article 243G read with Entry 3 of Schedule II of the Constitution minor irrigation, water management and watershed development are within the powers, authority and responsibilities of the Panchayat. I may then refer to Section 47 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act,2006, which, inter alia, is in the same term as aforesaid.Section 47 (4) is quoted hereunder:- “47(4)- Minor Irrigation, Water Management and Watershed Development- (i) Assisting the Government and Zila Parishad in the construction and maintenance of minor irrigation works; (ii) Implementation of schemes for community and individual irrigation.” From this it would be seen that it is local self government of that area, which has the power and the responsibility in this regard. The local self government i.e. Panchayat Samiti must take a conscious decision in this regard. Mr. Choubey, learned Senior Counsel raises apprehension in this regard. He submits that the Mukhiya being from the down stream village, cannot be impartial in the matter. Here, I may only note that when the Constitution has given us a local self government in the shape of Panchayat Samiti then surely once Mukhiya is elected , he has to rise above individual interest to the interest of the community at large whose representative being the Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat and is not 4 for any individual village or community. This is one forum where the grievance with regard to equitable distribution and utilization of water for irrigation can be taken . There is yet another enactment, which is more specific i.e. Bihar Irrigation Act, 1997. There with regard to various disputes about utilization and supply of irrigation water to public canal and distributary, statutory authorities have been designated like Canal Officer, Divisional Canal Officer and the Superintending Engineer, Minor Irrigation. Reference may be made in chapter 16 thereof. The two enactments that is the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act,2006 and the Bihar Irrigation Act, 1997 have harmoniously in this aspect of the matter. The petitioner would thus be well advised to use the two forums, so available, to resolve their disputes without taking law into their own hands. The authority including the Mukhiya has to provide for and look after interest of both the villages as the irrigation channel is one. This being a public irrigation channel, the police has little role to play except for maintenance of law and order. Under the Bihar irrigation Act, 1997, detailed provisions with regard to maintenance, repair and uses are provided. Statutory authorities and powers along with the responsibility are conferred on statutory authorities named therein , as noted above. If these authorities i.,e. Canal Officer, Divisional Canal Officer, Executive Engineer and Superintending Engineer hear the parties , examine the facts and 5 take an unbiased decision in consultation with the local self government, there would be no occasion for any dispute but such decision has to be taken promptly and enforced accordingly. It is only in that manner the problem of law and order can be resolved and the authorities cannot refuse to exercise their authorities in the matter . Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner should move the appropriate authority in this regard with specific grievance and it is hope and expected that the authorities would without loss of time come up with an amicable solution giving equitable right to all concerned so that once and for all problem is solved. The authorities are directed to act accordingly expeditiously if such a representation is filed. With these observations and directions the writ petition is disposed of. Singh ( Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)