CWP No.2037 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.2037 of 2010 Date of Decision: 8.2.2010 Kirpa Ram and others .....Petitioners Vs. Superintending Canal Officer Ferozepur Canal Circle and others ....Respondents .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA **** Present : Mr. C.M. Munjal, Advocate for the petitioners. .... RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral) Notice of motion. At the asking of the court, Mr. S.S. Sahu, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondents no.1 and 2, Mr.Sandeep Khunger and Mr.S.P.S.Tinna,Advocates have put in appearance on behalf of respondents no.3 and 4. Heard. While dismissing the petitioners' objections, the Divisional Canal Officer held that allocation of respondents no.3 and 4's land to out let no.29100/R Ramsara Minor, would not affect irrigation to the petitioners land. The Superintending Canal Officer, though accepted that there will be a cut in the turn of water to all share holders surprisingly held that there CWP No.2037 of 2010 2 will be no loss of irrigation to the petitioners land. The observations made by the Superintending Canal Officer are contradictory. Even otherwise, no explanation is forth coming, as to why the allocation of additional land to the outlet would not adversely affect irrigation to the land of the petitioners. The mode and manner of irrigation is best left to canal authorities but the least that can be expected is that when they propose to allocate additional land to an outlet or reject such a request, they should record a statistical finding. In view of what has been stated herein above, counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the writ petition be allowed, the order dated 7.1.2010, be set aside and the matter be remitted to the Superintending Canal Officer, Ferozepur Canal Circle, Ferozepur, for adjudication afresh. In view of the consensus between counsel for the parties, the writ petition is allowed, the order dated 7.1.2010 is set aside and the appeal is restored to the office of the Superintending Canal Officer, Ferozepur Canal Circle, Ferozepur, for adjudication afresh in accordance with law. It would be appreciated, if the Superintending Canal Officer examines the matter with a greater degree of care and records a statistical finding, whether allocation of land belonging to respondents no.3 and 4 to outlet no.29100/R would adversely affect irrigation to the petitioners' land. The Superintending Canal Officer shall also take into consideration, whether any other land has been retrieved or allocated from or to this outlet. Parties are directed to appear before the Superintending Canal Officer, Ferozepur Canal Circle, Ferozepur, on 26.2.2010. The appeal be decided within three months from the date of appearance of the parties. Till the decision of the appeal, the order dated 27.1.2009, passed by the CWP No.2037 of 2010 3 Divisional Canal Officer shall remain in abeyance. 8.2.2010 (RAJIVE BHALLA) GS JUDGE