Full Judgment Text
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6975 of 2019
Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 12783/2015) (@
MADAN LAL Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated
12.01.2015 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan in S.B. Civil
Second Appeal No. 317 of 2008.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are:
There was a dispute between the parties with regard to water
and how it is to be given to the field of contesting parties. This
dispute was taken to the Authorities under the Rajasthan Irrigation
and Drainage Act, 1954 (for short ‘the Act’). The appellant lost
before the said Authority.
The appellant, thereafter, filed a suit before the Trial Court
challenging the order of the Appellate Authority which was
dismissed. Aggrieved by the order of the Trial Court, the
appellant filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court, which
was allowed. The private respondents filed a Second Appeal in the
High Court and the High Court set aside the judgment of the First
Appellate Court and upheld the judgment of the Trial Court holding
that the Civil Court could not entertain or deal such disputes.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
MEENAKSHI KOHLI
Date: 2019.09.03
11:11:35 IST
Reason:
The High Court did not take into consideration Section 53 of
the Act which reads as follows:-
1
“53. Settlement of reference as to mutual rights
and liabilities of persons interested in water
course.-(1) Whenever a difference arises between two
or more persons in regard to their mutual rights or
liabilities in respect of the use, construction or
maintenance of a water course, any such person may
apply in writing to the Divisional Irrigation Officer
stating the matter in dispute; and such officer shall
thereupon give notice to the other persons interested
that, on a day to be named in such notice, he will
proceed to enquire into the said matter and, after
such enquiry, he shall pass his order thereon unless
he transfers (as he is hereby empowered to do) the
matter to the Collector who shall thereupon enquire
into and pass his order on the said matter.
(2) Such order shall be final as to the use or
distribution of water for any crop sown or growing at
the time when such order is made and shall thereafter
remain in force until set aside by the decree in a
Civil Court.”
A bare perusal of Section 53 shows that if there is a
difference between two or more persons with regard to rights and
liabilities in respect of the use, construction or maintenance of a
water courses, then the dispute has to be first referred to the
Divisional Irrigation Officer, who after giving notice shall
enquire the matter and pass an order. He can also transfer the
matter to the Collector who may enquire into the matter and dispose
it of. The appeal against the order of the Divisional Irrigation
Officer lies to the Superintending Irrigation Officer.
Section 53 (2) is absolutely clear that the order passed by
the Authorities under the Act would be final for any crop sown or
growing when such order is made and shall remain in force until set
aside by the decree of a Civil Court. This clearly implies that
the Civil Court has jurisdiction to entertain and decide such a
dispute. The only caveat is that the Civil Court shall not pass
any order in respect of crops sown or growing in the land at the
2
time of passing of the order.
The High Court fell in error while holding that the Civil
Court could not have set aside the suit. On this ground, we feel
that the judgment of the High Court requires to be set aside. We
order accordingly and remand the matter to the High Court to decide
the dispute on merits. We further direct that the Second Appeal
shall be treated to have been filed in the year 2008 and shall be
given priority accordingly.
The civil appeal is allowed.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
…....................J.
[DEEPAK GUPTA]
…....................J.
[ANIRUDDHA BOSE]
NEW DELHI;
August 27, 2019.
3
ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.13 SECTION XV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 12783/2015
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12-01-2015
in SBCSA No. 317/2008 passed by the High Court Of Judicature For
Rajasthan At Jodhpur)
MADAN LAL Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)
( IA No. 1/2015 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 27-08-2019 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pushpinder Singh, Adv.
Mr. Amrit Singh, Adv.
Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR
For Respondent(s) Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Satyendra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Shailja Nanda Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Harsha Vinoy, Adv.
Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR
Mr. Sunil Kr. Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Niraj Sharma, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The civil appeal is allowed in terms of the signed reportable
order.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
(MEENAKSHI KOHLI) (RENU KAPOOR)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
[Signed reportable order is placed on the file]
4