The main legal point established is that the irrigation authorities have no jurisdiction to treat command land as uncommand land and are obligated to provide irrigation facilities in accordance with the Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Act, 1954 and the Rules made thereunder.

JUDGMENT

Vijay Bishnoi, J —As per office report, service of notice upon the respondents have already been effected and as a matter of fact reply to the writ petition has also been filed on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of the parties the matter is heard finally today itself.

2. The brief facts of the case are that 25 Bighas of command land was allotted to one Milkhi Ram S/o. Ram Lal in Chak 18GD Murabba 145/15. The copy of the allotment letter is annexed with the writ petition as Annexure-2. Subsequently, after death of Milkhi Ram, the petitioners purchased the said 25 Bighas of command land from his legal heirs through registered sale-deed dated 02.06.2014.

3. The case of the petitioners is this that the respondents have declared the said 25 Bighas of land as uncommand land in the Chak Plan and illegally refused to provide irrigation facility to the said land.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the controversy involved in this petition has already been decided by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3697/2008 (Krishan Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan) decided on 13.04.2012, wherein this Court has held that any land allotted as command land could not have been treated to be uncommand land by the Irrigation Authorities.

5. It is also submitted by learned counsel fro the petitioners that the decision rendered in Krishan Kumar's case has been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.112/2017 (State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Pratap Singh & Ors.) .

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has therefore, prayed that the present writ petition may be allowed in terms of the judgment passed by this Court in Krishan Kumar's case . Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has opposed the prayer of the petitioners and submitted that due to scarcity of water the 25 Bighas of land allotted to Milkhi Ram has not been included in the Chak Plan and the said land is treated as uncommand land, therefore, irrigation facility cannot be provided by the respondents to the said land.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

8. This Court in Krishan Kumar's case has held as under:-

"8. Indisputably, the allotment of the land in question in favour of the petitioner's predecessor was made as command land by the competent authority after charging the price as required to be paid for irrigation land. It is also a common ground between the parties that the since the land allotted was command land, the irrigation facility was extended to it up to the year 1983. In this view of the matter, the irrigation authorities had no jurisdiction to consider the command land to be uncommond land on their own. As a matter of fa ct, while deciding the representation made by the petitioner, the respondent authority has proceeded with the presumption that the land in question is uncommond land and the same cannot be converted into command land inasmuch as the adequate water is not available in Anoopgarh Branch of the canal. In considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner's land which was command land when initially allotted could not have been treated to be uncommand land by the irrigation authorities. Thus, the respondent authority has committed an error in treating the land to be uncommand land.

9. The land held by the petitioner being command land the respondent authorities are under obligation to take appropriate steps to provide the irrigation facilities to the said land. The respondent authority has to consider the petitioner's demand for supply of the water in accordance with the provisions of the Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Act, 1954 and the Rules made thereunder."

9. In the present case also, 25 Bighas of command land was allotted to one Milkhi Ram vide Annexure-2. It is not in dispute that after death of Milkhi Ram, the said land was purchased by the petitioners from his legal heirs through registered sale-deed dated 02.06.2014 and at present the said land is recorded in name of pet