Vijender Jain, CJ.:-This judgment of ours will dispose of the above mentioned writ petitions as common questions of law and facts are involved therein.

2. The Government of Haryana took a decision to construct a canal to be called “Hansi - Butana Canal” with a view to take waters to the parched areas of the State and initiated steps to achieve the aforesaid objective which was sought to be stone-walled by a spate of writ petitions challenging its action on various grounds which we propose to delineate and discuss in the course of search for an answer to the controversy raised in the said petitions.

3. C.W.P.No.13404 of 2005 – Phul Singh and others Versus State of Haryana and others became the fountain-head petition from which other writ petitions flowed.

4. This writ petition coupled with C.W.P.No.16212 of 2005- Satish Kumar & others Versus State of Haryana & others; C.W.P.No.19676 of 2005- Jaswant Singh and others Versus State of Haryana and others, and C.W.P. No. 13691 of 2006- Gram Panchayat, Bibipur and others Versus The State of Haryana and others, particularly, encompass in their folds the entire gamut of the controversy. While the rest of the petitions are merely clo