A.K.MATHUR, J. - (1.) THE judgment disposes of the cases mentioned ins the Schedule appended to it as similar questions of law and facts are involved in these cases.
(2.) FOR the convenient disposal of these writ petitions the facts of Kartar Singh and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2285 of 1987 are taken into consideration: The petitioners got certain land in square No. 72 situated in Chak No. 33 G.B. This land was converted for the purpose of making bricks. After conversion, the petitioners obtained a licence for making bricks from the Mining Department, Government of Rajasthan. But before starting the work of making bricks, it was necessary to obtain water from the Irrigation Department for the purpose of making bricks. Therefore, the petitioner made an application for supply of water for this purpose. The petitioner was sanctioned water in accordance with the provisions of Rule 14 read with Rule 15 and Schedule -1 of the Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainge Rules, 1955 (here in after referred to as 'the Rules of 1955'). In this Schedule -1 at Section No. 1 provides the rate for supply of water, which reads as under: Brick making and pisa wall building at rate of 4 Annas 6 Pie per 100 cubic ft. Taking into consideration the above -mentioned rates the charges for the supply of water were calculated as Rs. 4,778 on 24 -1 -1983. The petitioner deposited the charges for supply of water as calculated. The sanction which has been issued vide Ex. 1 was extended from time to time by the Executive Engineer, Gang Canal, South Division, Sri Ganganagar. It is alleged that the petitioner again approached the respondent No. 2 for extension where upon he was told that the Government has decided to charge Rs. 10 per 1000 cft. for supply of water for industrial purposes and a copy of the order of the Government dated 11 -8 -1987 (Ex.2) was supplied to him. In view of this communication dated 11 -8 -1987 (Ex. 2), the respondents No. 2 and 3 did not extend the period and they insisted on the petitioners to deposit the amount in accordance with the rates of Rs. 10 per 1000 cft. and on deposit of the charger, the petitioner can be given water for construction of bricks. Hence, the petitioners approached this Court by filing the present writ petition challenging that the order of the Government is without jurisdiction and the respondents cannot insist on charging Rs 10 per 1000 cft. against the rates mentioned in the Schedule appended to the Rules.
(3.) A return has been filed on behalf of the respondents and the respondents had pleaded that in terms of Rule 14 they are entitled to charge at the rates as contracted in agreement Ex. 1. It was submitted that as per Ex. 1 the respondents can increase the rates from time to time and they can charge at the higher rates also.;