The Superintending Irrigation Officer has the authority to modify or revise the order passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer, and adherence to the statutory procedure and consideration of the interest of better irrigation are crucial in deciding water supply disputes.

( 1 ) HEARD, learned counsel for the parties. These two appeals arise out of common order passed by learned single Judge on 18-7-2000 deciding S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 923/99, Nand Ram v. State of Raj and S. B. Civil Writ petition No. 920/99. Both the writ petitions were preferred by two independent cultivators of Chak 3 B. H. M. , whose total holdings admeasured 53 bighas, challenging the same order dated 6-11-98 passed by the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation by which he did not confirm the order passed by Divisional Irrigation Officer for supply of water to the petitioner-appellant in each case through outlet situated at stone No. 378 through existing water course in Chak No. 2 B. H. M. (A ).

( 2 ) THE land in question is situated in Chak No. 3 B. H. M. The land was getting its water supply through water course existing in chak 3 B. H. M. from the outlet meant for supply therefor, when the petitioner-appellants made applications for getting water supply for irrigation through the existing water course situated in Chak 2. B. H. M. (A ). The applications wee considered by the Divisional Irrigation Officer in 1991 and he recommended that petitioner-appellants land situated in Chak 3 B. H. M. may be supplied water through the existing water course in question situated in chak 2. B. H. M. (A ). Water supply was commenced immediately in pursuance of the recommendation made by the Divisional Irrigation Officer. The cultivators of Chak No. 2 B. H. M. (A) promptly protested against this change of attaching the lands of chak 3 B. H. M. with Chak 2 B. H. M. (A) for water supply to it from the outlet in question through water course existing in Chak 2 B. H. M. (A ).

( 3 ) THIS led, in the first instance, to passing of an order by the Superintending Engineer on 1-10-91 at the behest of chief Engineer to whom grievance was ventilated by the cultivators of Chak 2 B. H. M. (A), for staying the implementation of recommendation of Divisional Irrigation Officer. Said order dated 1-10-91 was challenged by two separate writ petitions No. 5224/91 and 5415/91 one by Magha Ram and another by Nand Ram, who are presently appellants in the two appeals.

( 4 ) THE writ petition filed by Magha Ram was dismissed on 2-4-97 and another writ petition was also dismissed on 4-4-97 following decision dated 2-4-97. The Court upheld the power of the Superintending Irrigation Officer to modify or revise the order passed by Divisional Irrigation Officer. However, the Court remanded the case to the Superintending Engineer for deciding of issue afresh by giving opportunity to both the sides.

( 5 ) IT may be noticed that after the order of the Divisional Irrigation Officer was stayed by the Superinending Officer on 1-10-91 which was subjected to challenge in two writ petitions refered to above. In the first instance, the interim order was issued in favour of appellants petitioners by this Court, and was continued until the decision of the said writ petitions in April, 1997. Thereafter it was continued until decision was taken by Superintending Irrigation Officer on remand.

( 6 ) THE Superintending Irrigation Officer vide his impugned order dated 6-11-98 after noticing the written submissions made before him by the parties in detail, did not agree with the Divisional Irrigation Officer. He found that 53 bighas land in question can be irrigated through the water supply meant for 3 B. H. M. He also found that the order passed by Divisional Irrigation Officer for allowing the lands of the appellants to be irrigated through the water course meant for Chak 2 B. H. M. (A ). has been passed without adopting the procedure prescribed in law. The Superintending Irrigation Officer also referred to site inspection which was made by him in the presence of cultivators of both the Chaks and he opined that the water course in question of Chak 2 B. H. M. (A) cannot take more water. The fact that the water course has been constructed Pacca under the scheme of CAD an