- (1.) THIS writ petition is dir ected against a notice issued by the As sistant Engineer. Canal Division. Mirzapur. Respondent No. 1. asking the peti tioner and other residents of his village not to put a dam and thereby prevent the flow of the Poka Nala which passes through the village, otherwise they will make themselves liable to prosecution under Section 70 of the Northern India Canal and Drainage Act. The conten tion of the petitioners is that as it is a natural stream flowing through their village, the respondents have no right to ask them not to put a dam in the Nala for storing water for irrigating their fields. In the counter affidavit it has been stated that the Nala is maintained by the State Irrigation Department of Uttar Pradesh and when the villagers put a small kutcha dam inside the Nala it resulted in accumulation of water and in order to avoid any danger of over flowing the notice was served on them. It has been averred further that for irrigation purposes the tenure holders are not prevented from drawing water by any means which will not create any over-flooding and obstruction in the natu ral flow of the water.
(2.) I have heard the learned coun sel for the parties. With the supple mentary affidavit of respondent No. 1 a copy of the gazette notification dated 24th January 1962 has been annexed as Annexure I. This notification was issued under Section 55 of the Northern India Canal and Drainage Act and it was in pursuance of this notification that the im pugned notice was issued to the peti tioners. Section 55 reads:-- "Whenever it appears to the State Government that injury to any land or the public health or public convenience has arisen or may arise from the obstruc tion of any river, stream or drainage - channel, such government may, by notification published in the official gazette, prohibit, within limits to be defined in such notification, the forma tion of any obstruction, or may, within such limits, order the removal or other modification of such obstruction. Thereupon so much of the said river, stream or drainage-channel as is compris ed within such limits shall be held to be a drainage-work as defined in S. 3." In terms of Section 55, the State Government has power to prevent obstruction of any river or stream even if it is a natural stream under certain circumstances mentioned in the section. Thus the State Government is the sole judge of those circumstances. In this case the Government notification dated 24th January 1962 shows that the State was satisfied that by preventing the natural flow of water in Pokha Nala, a danger of public health and public convenience was apprehended. That being so, in my opinion the State Government was justified in issuing the aforesaid notification. Notice issued to the peti tioner was only to invite their attention to the aforesaid notification which was fully justified. There is no force in this petition and it is dismissed, but there will be no order as to costs. Writ petition dismissed.;