HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9617/2022

1.

Dhole Khan S/o Gagan Khan, Aged About 40 Years, By

Cast Musalman R/o Village Hariyar, Tehsil Pokran, District

Jaisalmer

2.

Lal Deen S/o Gagan Khan, Aged About 35 Years, By Cast

Musalman R/o Village Hariyar, Tehsil Pokran, District

Jaisalmer

3.

Khudabux S/o Dhole Khan, Aged About 25 Years, By Cast

Musalman R/o Village Hariyar, Tehsil Pokran, District

Jaisalmer

4.

Sodhe Khan S/o Dhole Khan, Aged About 20 Years, By

Cast Musalman R/o Village Hariyar, Tehsil Pokran, District

Jaisalmer

5.

Dhani W/o Raydhan Khan, Aged About 35 Years, By Cast

Musalman R/o Village Hariyar, Tehsil Pokran, District

Jaisalmer

6.

Maruyam D/o Dhole Khan, Aged About 20 Years, By Cast

Musalman R/o Village Hariyar, Tehsil Pokran, District

Jaisalmer

7.

Jamee D/o Lal Deen, Aged About 25 Years, By Cast

Musalman R/o Village Hariyar, Tehsil Pokran, District

Jaisalmer

8.

Majura D/o Husain Khan, Aged About 20 Years, By Cast

Musalman R/o Village Hariyar, Tehsil Pokran, District

Jaisalmer

----Petitioners

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary (Water

Resources Department) Jaipur Rajasthan.

2.

The Commissioner Colonization, Bikaner.

3.

The Dy. Commissioner, Colonization I.g.n.p, Nachana,

Distt. Jaisalmer.

4.

The Colonization Tehsildar, Nachana No. 2, Distt.

Jaisalmer.

5.

The Executive Engineer, Indra Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna,

Tmc Division Mohangarh, Jaisalmer.

6.

The Assistant Engineer, Indra Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna,

(2 of 3)

[CW-9617/2022]

Tmc Division Mohangarh, Jaisalmer.

7.

The Board Of Revenue, Ajmer.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Ms. Anita Singh

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Rajdeep Singh Chouhan

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Order

15/07/2022

1.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that number

of petitions involving identical grievance have been allowed by this

Court, vide judgment dated 25.1.2016, passed in a bunch of writ

petitions led by SBCWP No.13842/2015 (Gulsher Khan Vs. State

of Rajasthan & Ors.); which has been duly followed by another

coordinate Bench in decision dated 24.10.2017 passed in SBCWP

No.11508/2017 (Gemar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.).

2.

Mr. Rajdeep Singh Chouhan, learned counsel for the

respondents in principal agreed that the issue is broadly covered,

however, apprehended that in guise of the judgment of this Court,

the petitioners are seeking irrigation facilities to their land, even

when they are not in the command area.

3.

Having heard rival submissions, the present writ petition is

disposed of in terms of the following directions given by this Court

in the cases of Gulsher Khan and Gemar Singh (supra), with

further directions that the petitioners shall be given irrigation

facilities only if, their land(s) fall in the command area.

(i) The petitioners shall approach respective Executive

Engineer of IGNP Department by 15.08.2022 and furnish

(3 of 3)

[CW-9617/2022]

documentary evidence regarding their ownership and title of the

agriculture lands, which is in their possession.

(ii) Those petitioners, who are not having any documentary

evidence regarding their ownership and title of the said agriculture

land but their dispute regarding title of the said agriculture land is

pending either before departmental authorities or before

competent courts and stay order is passed in their favour, can also

furnish copies of said stay order passed by the departmental

authorities or competent courts by 15.08.2022.

(iii) The respective Executive Engineer of IGNP Department

after verifying the documentary evidence, furnished by the

petitioner, or after taking into consideration the stay order passed

in their favour by the departmental authorities or competent

courts shall consider the cases of the petitioners for inclusion of

their names in barabandi for ensuing years strictl