Civil Writ Petition No.10050 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.10050 of 2010 Date of decision:- August 2, 2011 Ram Phal & another .....Petitioners VERSUS The Superintending Canal Officer & others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH PRESENT: Mr. S.R. Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Sunil Nehra, DAG, Haryana, for the State. Mr. Manoj Chahal, Advocate, for respondent Nos.4 to 6. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. Petitioner No.1 filed an application before the Deputy Collector (D.C), Water Services Division, Hisar on 8.8.2008, who accepted the demand of the petitioner and all other co-sharers of outlet RD No.6028-R, Khanpur Minor, except respondent Nos.4 to 6, for sanctioning warabandi on the water course. On an appeal filed by respondent-Jogi Ram, Divisional Canal Officer(D.C.O.), Hisar, set aside the order. The petitioners and other co-sharers made an application for fixing their turn of water on the kachha water course taken by them from Nafe Singh etc. The petitioners made a statement for accepting their appeal because at that time there was cogent apprehension of the quarrel/fight taking place between them and the private respondents. Respondent Nos.4 & 5 Civil Writ Petition No.10050 of 2010 -2- challenged this order passed by the D.C.O., who found that the Wari (turn of water) sanctioned by D.C is economical and useful in saving canal water. Against this order, private respondents filed an appeal before the Superintending Canal Officer (S.C.O.), who without serving any notice, wrongly set aside the well reasoned orders of D.C and D.C.O. It is against this order that the petitioners have approached this Court through the present writ petition. It is not seriously disputed before me that all the co- sharers were not heard by S.C.O. while passing the impugned order. Since the right of hearing has been denied to co-sharers, therefore, it would be appropriate to remand the case back to the S.C.O. to pass a fresh order after affording an opportunity of hearing to all the co- sharers. The impugned orders, therefore, are set aside. The matter is remitted back to S.C.O. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the S.C.O. on 30.8.2011, who shall serve notice on all the co-sharers and then pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the S.C.O. would be at liberty to decide the mater in accordance with law. August 02, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH) monika JUDGE