Water Distribution Dispute under Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Act: Supreme Court Judgment

In a landmark case involving a water distribution dispute under the Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Act, the Supreme Court has rendered a significant judgment. The case revolved around the rights and liabilities related to water courses between the parties. The dispute, originating at the divisional level, made its way through various courts before reaching the apex court. Stay tuned to learn about the key aspects and outcomes of this crucial legal battle.

Facts

The appellant filed a suit challenging the order of the Appellate Authority which was dismissed
The Trial Court order was also challenged, and the appeal before the First Appellate Court was allowed
The dispute was taken to the Authorities under the Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Act of 1954
The appellant lost before the said Authority
The appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Rajasthan in the mentioned Civil Second Appeal
The dispute between the parties involved water distribution to their fields
Private respondents filed a Second Appeal in the High Court
High Court set aside the judgment of the First Appellate Court
High Court upheld the judgment of the Trial Court
Civil Court was held to be unable to entertain or deal with such disputes

Also Read: Court’s Jurisdiction in Re-appraising Arbitrator’s Findings

Analysis

Section 53 of the Act outlines the procedure for settling disputes regarding mutual rights and liabilities related to water courses.
Any person involved in a dispute can apply to the Divisional Irrigation Officer stating the matter in writing.
The Officer will then give notice to all parties involved and conduct an enquiry before passing an order.
The order issued by the Authorities under the Act will be final for any crop sown or growing at the time of the order, and will remain in force until overturned by a Civil Court decree.
The appeal against the order of the Divisional Irrigation Officer lies to the Superintending Irrigation Officer.
This implies that the Civil Court has jurisdiction to entertain and decide such a dispute.
Civil Court can only refrain from passing any order regarding crops sown or growing at the time of passing the order.
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5