D.P. Gupta, J.
1. The petitioners are cultivating square Nos. 2, 7, 24, 35 and 51 of Chak No. 34 GG in Tehsil Sri Ganganagar. The existing water Course for cultivating the aforesaid field used to run diagonally across square No. 51 and then in a straight line from stone line No. 108/167 to 108/164. The petitioners represented to the Divisional Irrigation Officer (North), Sri Ganganagar by an application dated July 5. 1972 that the slope of the land in their squares was from east to west and as the existing watercourse was situated on the western side of square Nos. 2, 7, 24 and 35 it was not possible for them to irrigate the entire land of these squares, with the result that the eastern part of the land of the aforesaid squares remained without irrigation, The petitioner sought permission to construct a water course on the eastern side of the aforesaid squares, so that the water course may run in a straight line from stone point 107/168 to 107/164.The petitioners also submitted that they would themselves bear the expenses to be incurred in constructing the new water-course.
2. The Divisional Irrigation Officer on receipt of the application of the petitioners issued a general notice to the occupants of all the lands in Chak-34 GG inviting objections, if any, regarding the shifting of the watercourse as proposed by the petitioners. The Divisional Irrigation Officer, after hearing the objections and after taking into consideration the killa levels of the land in square Nos. 2, 7, 24, 35 and 51, came to the conclusion that the slope of the land was from east to west and the level of the proposed watercourse at stone line 107 would be higher than at stone line 108, where the existing water-course was situated. The Divisional Irrigation Officer, therefore, held that it would be desirable, in the interests of better irrigation facilities, that the water-course should be shifted to higher level, namely from stone line 108 to stone line 107. He also directed that double 'nakas' should be provided in the proposed water-course in the interest of better irrigation. The counsel for the objectors also agreed to the proposal put by the Divisional Irrigation Officer and a consent order was passed by him on January 19, 1973.
3. The respondent No. 4 and one Mathuradas, who were cultivating the lands in quare Nos. 18, 26, 3, 28 and 21 filed a petition before the Collector, Sri Ganganagar challenging the order passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer dated January 19, 1973 but that application was dismissed by the Collector, Sri Ganganagar by his order dated April 30, 1973. The respondents Nos. 4 and 5 filed an appeal before the Superintending Irrigation Officer, Bikaner Irrigation Circle, Sri Ganganagar against the very same order passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer (North), Sri Ganganagar dated January 19, 1973. The Superintending Engineer, who is the Superintending Irrigation Officer, accepted the appeal by his order dated July 30, 1973 as he was of the view that only four square lengths of water-course have been cancelled and seven new square lengths have been sanctioned by the Divisional Irrigation Officer, which would result in constructing additional square lengths, with the consequence of loss of time to the entire chak.
4. In this writ petition it was argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Superintending Irrigation Officer took note of the fact that the killa levels of square Nos. 2, 7, 24, 35 and 51 which were irrigated by the petitioners, showed that the slope of the land of these field, was from east to west but inspite of this fact, he erroneously proceeded to set aside the order passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer, which was passed with the consent of all concerned cultivators and was in the interests of improving the irrigation facilities in the chak.
5. During the pendency of this writ petition, one significant change which has occurred is that the Executive Engineer.Ganga Canal (North Drvi.) Sri Gang anagar, by his order dated April 14, 1981 has sanctioned the division of chak No. 34GG into two different, 'chaks' on the ground that the said 'chak' as originally constituted, consisted of 77 squares and was unwielding. The Divisional Irrigation Officer was of the view that in the interest of better irrigation facilities and for providing water to the cultivators of each square for a longer duration, chak 34 GG should be divided into two Thus another chak No. 34 GG/B has been carved out of the original chak 34 GG. The line of division between the two new chaks was sanctioned by the Divisional Irrigation Officer along the stone line 110/70 to 110/164. Anew 'mokha' or outlet was also sanctioned by the Divisional Irrigation Officer in respect of the newly formed chak 34GG/B at stone point 11/170. In this manner, squares falling towards the west of stone line 110, including the squares 18 and 21 cultivated by the respondents Nos. 4 and 5, would now form part of the newly constituted chak 34GG/B. While squares falling towards the east of the stone line 110 would remain part of the original chak 34GG.
6. Learned Counsel for the parties agree that the question of better irrigation facilities should now be redecided by the Superintending Irrigation Officer in the light of the changed circumstances. The Superintending Irrigation Officer should now consider as to whether even after the division of chak 34GG into two separate chaks, there should be any interference with the order passed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer dated January 19, 1973 in the interest of better irrigation facilities in the now remaining chak No. 34GG. There is no doubt that on account of the change which has been brought about by the division of chak No. 34GG into two separate chaks, the question of better irrigation facilities in the area, which would now constitute the remaining chak No. 34GG, requires a reconsideration.
7. In the result, the order passed by the Superintending Irrigation Officer, Bikaner Irrigation Circle, Sri Ganganagar dated July 13, 1973 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Superintending Irrigation Officer to redecide the appeal preferred before it by the respondents Nos. 4 and 5, in the light of the developments which have taken place recently and in the interest of better irrigation facilities. The Superintending Irrigation Officer should give the parties concerned an opportunity of hearing before proceeding to redecide the appeal.
8. The parties are left to bear their own costs of this writ petition.