JUDGMENT :

1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs :

“It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate writ, order or direction:

(i) The impugned order dated 03.08.2023 (Ann.13) passed by8 learned Addl. District Judge No.1, Nohar District Hanumangarh may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(ii) The order dated 20.07.2023 (Ann.11) passed by learned Civil Judge, Nohar District Hanumangarh may kindly be ordered to be maintained.

(iii) The respondent no.3 may kindly be directed to remove the siphon pulia and ordered to construct the pulia as per the permission order dated 11.09.2019 (Annex-1).

(iv) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners.”

2. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the petitioners, are that the petitioners are having an agricultural land, wherefor they are getting the irrigation facility from pucca water course between stone no.316/402 & stone no.316/403. The respondent no.1 filed an application for construction of the pucca pulia over the said water course to reach his land situated in Kila No.2 of Chak 24 JSN Stone No. 316/403, and permission for the same was granted by the respondent no.3.

2.1. Thereafter, the respondent-authorities issued a notice on 31.05.2022 to the respondent no.1, stating therein that the respondent no.1 has not constructed the pulia, strictly as per the sanction order.

2.2. The respondent no.1, being aggrieved, filed a suit for permanent injunction along with an application seeking temporary injunction against the removal of the constructed siphon pulia before the learned Civil Judge, Nohar. Thereafter, the learned Court below, upon hearing the parties, vide order dated 04.02.2023, rejected the temporary injunction application. The respondent no.1 preferred an appeal, against the said order, before the learned Additional District Judge No.1, Nohar, District Hanumangarh, which was allowed vide order dated 20.02.2023, while remanding the matter back to the learned Trial Court for fresh consideration.

2.3. Thereafter, the learned Trial Court, upon hearing the parties again rejected the temporary injunction application, vide order dated 20.07.2023. The respondent no.1 again preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge No.1, Nohar, which was allowed vide order dated 03.08.2023 and the injunction order was passed, whereby it was ordered that the siphon pulia shall not be removed, and the usage thereof shall not be disturbed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the siphon pulia was constructed by the respondent no.1 without the sanction order, and therefore, no prima facie case was made out in favour of the respondent no.1; thus, the impugned order dated 03.08.2023 is not justified in law.

3.1. Learned counsel further submitted that the respondent no.1 constructed the siphon pulia against the prescribed parameters; the respondent no.1 has also constructed two chambers by damaging the pucca water course and also installed the pipe, in deep, due to which the water flow as provided to the petitioners would be obstructed.

3.2. Learned counsel also submitted that the learned Court below, after hearing the parties, vide order dated 04.02.2023, has rightly rejected the temporary injunction application filed by the respondent no.1, but the learned Appellate Court below has accepted such prayer for the temporary injunction, without any cogent reason, and therefore, the impugned order dated 03.08.2023 is not sustainable in the eye of law.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1, while opposing the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the petitioners, submitted that due to the khala, the respondent’s land was divided into two parts, and therefore, the respondent,