IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 5489 of 1986 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.04.2011 Gian Chand and others ...Petitioners Versus The Divisional Canal Officer and others ..Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: None for the petitioners. Mr. Anjum Ahmed, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. ..... RAJESH BINDAL, J. Challenge in the present petition is to the orders Annexures P5 and P-8 passed by the Sub Divisional Canal Officer, Jakhauli Sub Division, Kaithal and Divisional Canal Officer, Kaithal. A perusal of the order Annexure P-5 shows that it has been noticed therein that water course, running for the last 14-15 years, was passing through the fields of Gian Chand, Balbir, Ishwar, Krishan sons of Karta Ram. It had been dismantled by these persons, which was the only water course for irrigating the fields of the petitioners (before Sub Divisional Canal Officer). Under these circumstances, vide order (Annexure P-5), it was directed that the water course already existing be restored as temporary water course under Rule 24 of Haryana Canal and Drainage Act, 1974 up to 29.7.1987. Aggrieved against the order, the present petitioners preferred appeal before the Divisional Canal Officer. It was dismissed on 4.9.1986. The writ petition filed in this court was admitted on August 24, 1987. However, at the time of issuance of notice of motion on 10.10.1986, operation of the impugned orders was stayed. Vide impugned order (Annexure P-5), the temporary water course was to be restored only up to 29.7.1987, the relief prayed in the present petition has apparently been rendered infructuous as the life of the order itself has elapsed. However, as learned counsel for the petitioners, is not available, the present writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 05.04.2011 sharmila