NElZAL 

Ron. Ii. A. Beckwlth, Chairman 

Board of Water Engineers 

302 W. 15th St. 

Austin, Texas Opinion No. S-134 

Re: Whether the provision for 

reverslon of water rights 

to the State on dissolution 

of a water control and improvement district, contained in Article 7880-77b, 

V.C.S., is automatic. 

Dear Sir: 

Your opinion request of March 23, 1954 reflects 

the following facts: 

In 1931, your Board issued a permit to Al and 

Lloyd Parker to appropriate 10,034 acre-feet of water per 

annum from the Rio Grande in Cameron County for the purpose of irrigating 5,017 acres of land and to create a 

reservoir with a storage capacity of 5,017 acre-feet, the 

permit providing that the water was to be diverted into 

the reservoir by means of a designated canal. The day 

after the permit was issued, the Parkers transferred the 

permit and all rights thereunder to Cameron County Water 

Control & Improvement District No. 18. Such district, 

while still,record owner of the permit, was dissolved on 

July 31, 1940 under Article 7880-77b, V.C.S. 

ing only partial completion of the plant. 

;nd 1932 showNo further 

Reports were filed in 1930k 1931 

reports having been received, your Board held a hearing 

in 1942 to cancel the permit butdismissed the proceedings when A. F. Parker protested in writing. Parker filed 

reports only for 1943 and 1946, each reflecting no use of 

the water and admitting the permit had been inactive for 

a "number of years." On September 28, 1953, your 3oard 

cancelled the permit without notice or hearing. Affidavits recently filed reflect that 1,000 acres were irrigated 
. . 

Hon. H. A. Beckwith - page 2 (No.S-134) 

in 1929, 1931 and 1932 and are now being irrigated, 

but no reservoir was ever created. 

As we interpret your letter, your purpose is to 

ascertain the validity of your action cancelling the aforesaid permit, and based on that assumption, we shall answer 

your letter accordingly. 

Articles 7474, 7519 and 7544, V.C.S., provide for 

forfeiture of a permit under circumstances such as above 

outlined. The first two statutes: above mentioned contain 

provisions requiring notice and hearing. 

Article 7880-77b deals with dissolution of water 

control and improvement districts and provides that when the 

assets of the district have been liquidated and all debts 

paid, '. . _ the directors of the district shall enter of 

record their final order of dissolution . . . and thereupon 

any water rights held from the State shall revert to the 

State and may not, in anticipation of dissolution, be assigned by the district to be so dissolved." 

There is no provision in said statute for notice, 

and its terms indicate the reversion is intended~ to be automatic. Indeed, there would seem to be no reason for notice 

or hearing. The permit was an asset of the district at the 

time of its dissolution. Such districts are arms of the 

State government. The directors of the district are "the 

managing officers in charge of all the business and affairs 

of the district. o . ;" Art. 7880-36, V,C.S. 

The entry of the order of dissolution by the Board 

of Directors under Art. 7880-77b, V.C.S., was a voluntary 

act. The initiative was theirs, not the StateIs. They are 

presumed to know the legal consequences of their acts, and 

doubtless they did know, since the statute under which they 

acted in dissolving the district also provides for the reversion. It would seem unreasonable to give notice and have 

a hearing to protect the permit holder against the plain 

statutory consequences of its own voluntary act. The statute 

is plain, and even if notice and hearing were had, there is 

no authority given to the Board of Water Engineers or to any 

other agency to deny the reversion. 

We hold, therefore; that the permit automatically 

reverted to the State at the time of the dissolution of the 

district. 
Hon. H. A. Deckwith, page 3 (S-134) 

SUMMARY 

Upon dissolution of a water control 

and improvement district under Article 

7880-77b, V.&s., a water permit owned 

by said district automatically, without 

notice or hearing, reverts to the State. 

Yours very truly, 

JORRBRN SREPPRRD 

Attorney General 

APPROVD: 

John Atchison 

Land Division 

Willis E. Gresham 

Reviewer 

Robert S. Trotti 

~First Assistant 

John Ben Shepperd 

Attorney General 

JAS:bt 

J. Arthur Sandlin 

Assistant