- (1.) By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,Daryao Singh and 15 others landowners of village Bhagwanpura, pray for the issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 21st January, 1977 (copy Annexure P.4) passed by the Chief Canal Officer, respondent No. 1 allowing the revision petition filed by respondent No. 4 and shifting some of his lands from watercourse RD 9475-L of Ghaso minor to RD 12049-L Ghaso minor.
(2.) The petitioners are residents and landowners of village Bhagwanpura. Their lands are being irrigated through outlet RD 12049-L of Ghaso minor. Chhailu Ram hails from village Ghaso Kalan, and has his lands in the area of that village. Ranjit brother of Chhailu, abovementioned, along with other right- holders of village Ghaso Kalan moved an application before the Divisional Canal Officer praying for the transfer of 33/33 acres of land from RD 9475-L to RD 12049-L on the ground that the lands were not getting proper irrigation from existing watercourse. The Divisional Canal Officer rejected this prayer vide order dated December 12, 1973 for the reason that irrigation percentage of the area is already 104% as against the permissible percentage of 62%.They filed an appeal against this order and the same was dismissed by the Superintending Canal Officer vide order dated 14.3.1974. He confirmed the finding of Divisional Canal Officer. He held that the percentage of irrigation of the land in dispute, i.e. 104% was quite high. The decision of Divisional Canal Officer was technically sound and under the law applicable. At that time, no appeal or revision was provided against the order of the Superintending Canal Officer and his order became final.
(3.) The Legislative Assembly enacted the Haryana Canal and Drainage Act, 1974 (hereinafter called the Act). Chhailu and others filed another application for the transfer of the same 33/33 acres of land from RD 9475-L to the chak of RD 12049-L Ghaso minor. This prayer was allowed by the Divisional Canal Officer vide order dated 8.4.1976. The appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed by the Superintending Canal Officer. A provision has been made for filing revision to the Chief Canal Officer which provision was not available in the Northern India Canal and Drainage Act under which the previous proceedings were taken.;