JASBIR SINGH,J - (1.) PETITIONERS who are 46 in number, are the residents of villages Risalia Khera, Keharwala and Chak Faridpur, Tehsil Rania, District Sirsa have filed the present writ petition challenging the order passed by respondent No. 3 dated 31.7.2000 (Annexure P-4) vide which respondent No. 3 has modified the order dated 7.4.2000 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No. 2 Superintending Canal Officer, Bhakra Water Services Circle, Sirsa.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioners are the co-sharers in the command area of outlet RD No. 156033-R Mammer Khera Disty. They made on application to respondent No. 1 with a prayer that from the present water outlet they are not getting proper irrigation as in a span of about 6 acres of land through which the water course carries water there exist 3 culverts and also the water course is curved at 2 places due to which the flow of water is not proper and they are not getting sufficient water for irrigation of their land. A prayer was made that the Head of water outlet be shifted to RD No. 157353-R and in this manner the water course will become straight and it will enhance their irrigation. The application was sent to the Ziledar and Sub Divisional Canal Officer, Mammer Khera. Field investigation was done by them and both these officers recommended the case for shifting of the water outlet as mentioned above. On receipt of above mentioned proposal, a draft scheme was prepared under Section 17 of the Haryana Canal and Drainage Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The scheme was published, objections were invited as per law and in response thereto the private respondents put up their appearance and they raised an objection that by shifting Head of the water outlet as proposed, their irrigation will suffer since the water course is going to be shifted towards the down stream and they will not be getting proper water in that event. The case was taken up by respondent No. 1 who, without appreciating the entire evidence on the record and also without inspecting the site himself, rejected the draft scheme vide order dated 3.3.1999 (Annexure P-2) simply by stating that by shifting the water outlet towards the down stream side, problem will be created to the share holders whose area falls is on the up-strearn side.
(3.) PETITIONERS feeling aggrieved by the order (Annexure P-2), filed an appeal before respondent No. 2 who, after visiting the spot and appreciating the evidence on record came to a definite conclusion that by shifting of the water Outlet as proposed, the irrigation of the lands of the petitioners will increase and he also ensured that by the change no loss is caused to the private respondents. Respondent No. 2 vide his order dated 7.4.2000 allowed the appeal and ordered the shifting of water outlet as proposed in the draft scheme. The private respondents then filed an appeal before respondent No. 3, who vide order (Annexure P-4) modified the order passed by respondent No. 2 and ordered that the water outlet be moved and be fixed at a common boundary line of Khasra No. 12-13, 9-8, 2-3 of Rectangle No. 55.;