The attachment of a property does not extinguish the rights, title, and interest of the owner, and the attaching authority cannot act arbitrarily.

This writ petition has been preferred against the order dated 12-102006 (Annex.3) whereby the Executive Engineer, Gangnahar South Division, Sriganganagar directed stoppage of irrigation water supply on the agricultural land comprised in Murabba Nos. 51 and 23 in Chak-29 RB; and against the order dated 15-11-2006 (Annex.6) whereby the Superintending Engineer, Water Resources, Circle Sriganganagar dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners against the aforesaid order dated 12-10-2006.

2. Put in a nutshell, the relevant aspects of the matter are that the aforesaid agricultural land seems to have been allotted to Baishakha Singh, father of petitioner No.1 and came to be attached in recovery of the loan amount due to the Punjab National Bank, Raisinghnagar. The Executive Engineer, Ganghahar South Division, Sriganganagar, pursuant to a communication dated 16-7-2006 as received from the Tehsildar (Revenue), Raisinghnagar issued instructions under the impugned order dated 12-10-2006 (Annex.3) to the Assistant Engineer, Irrigation Sub-Division, Raisinghnagar to discontinue the water supply of the land under attachment. It appears that the said Tehsildar addressed yet another communication to the Executive Engineer on 18-10-2006 for enforcing the distress order whereto the Executive Engineer stated a reply on 3-11-2008 (AnnexA) and, while taking exception to the nature of language employed by the Tehsildar, pointed out that necessary orders had already been issued but the water turn could not be discontinued in the mid crop season. The learned Executive Engineer also pointed out that for the purpose of recovery of the loan amount of the Bank or any other Institution, there was no provision in the Irrigation Rules to discontinue with the water supply and such proceedings were adopted only by way of departmental co-operation but when the matters were taken up in litigation, the department was unnecessarily required to defend the same and. Therefore, opined that the attached land be given on contract basis by way of temporary auction. The Executive Engineer stated to the Tehsildar thus:

(Vernacular matter omitted.......... Ed.)

3. It is, however, borne out from the record that pursuant to the impugned order dated 12-10-2006, the Patwari concerned proceeded to discontinue with the water supply of the said land on 6-11-2006 and informed the Assistant Engineer accordingly (vide Annex.5).

4. The present petitioners preferred an appeal before the Superintending Engineer, Water Resources, Circle Sriganganagar and submitted that no receiver was appointed on the land and, merely on the basis of a communication of the Tehsildar that the land was not being auctioned, water turn could not have been discontinued. The petitioners also submitted that they were in possession of the land in question and had cultivated the same and ought to have, at least, been heard before passing and implementing the adverse orders.

5. The learned Superintending Engineer proceeded to dismiss the appeal so filed by the petitioners by the impugned order dated 15-11-2006 (Annex.6) on the notions and with the observations that after attachment. no right remains in the owner; that it was the sweet will of the attaching officer whether to apply for water turn or not; and that the Executive Engineer had rightly acted on the• request of the Tehsildar. According to the learned Superintending Engineer,(Vernacular matter omitted.......... Ed.)

6. The orders and action aforesaid are challenged in this writ petition precisely on the submission that even when the land came under attachment, the Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Act. 1954 and the Rules there under do not authorise the irrigation authorities to discontinue with the water supply on such land and the entire action being fundamentally unauthorised, deserves to be annulled. It has been stated in opposition to the writ petition in the reply filed by the respondents that since the land in question had been attached by the