Laxman Rohidas And Others vs State Of Odisha And Others

V. Narasingh, J

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Opposite Parties 4 & 5.

The Petitioners claiming to be farmers of Belmunda have filed this writ petition assailing the notice at Annexure-3 by which the Opposite Party No.4-the Sarpanch of Samasingha Gram Panchayat restrained the use of water from Samasingha Bada Kata (Belmunda Kata) dated 12.02.2026. The notice at Annexure-3 is extracted hereunder:-

The relief sought for by the Petitioners is extracted hereunder:-

"The petitioner most respectfully prays that the Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to allow the writ petition, issue a writ or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction quashing Notice No. 18 dated 12.02.2026 of the Sarpanch of Samasingha Grama Panchayat under Annexure-3 and further issue a writ or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to Opp. Party Nos. 2 to 5 to allow the petitioners to take water from Belmunda Kata (Samasingha Bada Kata) Water Reservoir for irrigation of the Rabi Crop, 2026 and pass such other or further order or orders as are deemed just and proper."

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners, Mr. Mohanty that water from the said Samasingha Bada Kata (Belmunda Kata) is necessary for Rabi crop cultivated by the farmers and restraining them from using the water will result in irreparable loss.

The brief facts germane for adjudication is that since farmers were restrained from availing water facility from the said Samasingha Bada Kata (Belmunda Kata) for irrigation of their Rabi crop in 2024, they approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.6952 of 2024.

This Court by order dated 28.03.2024 disposed of the said writ petition with the following direction:-

"Considering such grievance of the Petitioners, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Block Development Officer, Kolabira (O.P. No.3) to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-4 dated 26th February 2024, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The BDO is further directed to consider immediate release of water (within one week) from the reservoir to the farm lands of present Petitioners keeping in view the ensuing Summer."

And, the BDO pursuant to the order of this Court considering the competing claims, after detailed discussion with the Petitioners in the said writ petition, Opposite Party No.4-Sarpanch of Samasingha Gram Panchayat and Opposite Party No.5-Maa Saraswati SHG, lessee, in whose favour the highest bid was settled from 01.07.2023 to 30.06.2028 unanimously took the following decisions:-

"After detail discussion with the Petitioners present, Sarpanch Samasingha, SHG members and other Government Officials it was unanimously decided to safeguard the interest of the dependent cultivators of the nearby farmland along with pisciculture which is one major source of internal income of the Gram Panchayat and following resolutions were passed to avoid any dispute in future.

Before Rabi season the list of farmers along with areas of cultivation to be finalized basing on the water bearing capacity of the Kata with joint verification of Agriculture, Fishery and Revenue Staff with the initiation of Sarpanch Samasingha GP. So that irrigation of the farmland along with pisciculture will not suffer.

The President, Secretary and other group members of Maa Saraswati SHG, Samasingha present in the meeting also agreed to release water in future for cultivation and will not create dispute in the matter. Any dispute arising in the matter amicably settled by the said committee of Agriculture, Fishery and Revenue Officials under the chairmanship of Sarpanch Samasingha."

(Emphasized)

It is stated that violating the said decision, unilaterally Annexure-3 has been issued thereby affecting the Petitioners right to livelihood.

It is the further submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioners that referring to the ROR at Annexure-1 that Belmunda Kata is under the Rakhit Khata of Government of Odisha and relying on Section 54 of the Orissa Irrigation Act, 1959, submits that State has the authority to earmark the land as irrigation source and it is his further submission that ex-facie, the agreement entered into between the Opposite Party No.4-Sarpanch of Samasingha Gram Panchayat and Opposite Party No.5-Maa Saraswati SHG (lessee) is against the provisions as contained in Rule 48(2) of the Odisha Grama Panchayat Rules, 2014 in as much as the same is not in terms of the statutory form-C thereof, though the same is labelled as such.

And, referring to the same, it is submitted that the order issued by the Sarpanch at Annexure-

3 on the ground that there is unauthorized use of water from the Samasingha Bada Kata (Belmunda Kata) is ex-facie without jurisdiction.

Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.4 referring to the counter affidavit submits that the list of the farmers in terms of the settlement on which reliance is being placed by the Petitioners has not been submitted and the representation annexed as Annexure-4 to the additional affidavit of the Petitioner is a concocted document in as much as in the said document stated to have been submitted on 17.11.2025 does not contain the name of Petitioner No.2 who died on 27.03.2026 and in fact such list was created for the purpose of this case to comply with the direction of this Court dated 16.03.2026.

Relevant extract of the said order is culled out hereunder:-

"2. Referring to the instruction qua Rabi season of financial year 2025-26, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Mohanty is called upon to submit the list of farmers along with areas of cultivation to the Sarpanch of Samasingha Grama Panchayat and the same also be placed on record by way of affidavit before this Court.

xxxx.

The details of cultivators as indicated above shall be submitted by 18.03.2026 after serving a copy thereof on the learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel, Mr. P.K. Mohanty for the Opposite Party No.4 who undertakes to file vakalatnama in the meanwhile."

Hence, it is submitted that since the condition precedent for seeking the water for farm land have not been satisfied in terms of earlier direction passed by this Court, the Petitioners do not have the cause of action to maintain the writ petition.

The submissions of the learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.5, the lease holder relying upon their respective counter affidavit is also to the same effect.

The Petitioners has submitted rejoinder to the counter affidavit, filed by the Opposite Parties.

Admittedly, there is nothing on record to indicate that the representation annexed to the affidavit has been submitted as per the consensus reflected in Annexure-3 in obedience to the earlier directions of this Court.

It does not stand to reason notwithstanding the rancor relating to supply of water for irrigation of Rabi crops raised by the Petitioners, they will not submit any written representation. Claim to handover a copy of such representation without any acknowledgment thereof. Since submission of such representation is being disputed and there is no prima facie material to indicate that the same has been submitted in the light of the stand taken by the authorities, the same falls within the realm of disputed questions of fact. Hence, cannot be taken into account.

The learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.4- the Sarpanch of Samasingha Gram Panchayat has pointed out that in Annexure-4, it is stated that total land requiring water for "Rabi crop" is stated to be as Ac 20.680 whereas in paragraph-9 of the writ petition, the area has been shown as Ac.15.00. Hence, on account of contradictory statements made, the claim of the Petitioners does not merit consideration.

While taking the unanimous decision keeping in view the competing claims of the stake holders, the Opposite Party No.3-the Block Development Officer, Kolabira was conscious of the fact that the lessee in question is valid up to the year 2028.

The only ground on which the claim of the Petitioners inter alia is being resisted is that the steps in terms of submission of list of farmers along with the area of cultivation have not been submitted.

Paragraph-2 of the said unanimous decision which is still in vogue and not disputed by the Opposite Parties is extracted hereunder at the cost of repetition:-

"2. The President, Secretary and other group members of Maa Saraswati SHG, Samasingha present in the meeting also agreed to release water in future for cultivation and will not create dispute in the matter. Any dispute arising in the matter amicably settled by the said committee of Agriculture, Fishery and Revenue Officials under the chairmanship of Sarpanch Samasingha."

(Emphasized)

Hence, on a conspectus of materials on record, in the light of the Petitioners right under Article 19(1)(g) & 21 of the constitution of India, applying the doctrine of moulding of relief (Ref: Ramesh Kumar v. Kesho Ram, AIR 1792 SC 700) which inheres in this Court exercising plenary jurisdiction, balancing equity inter se between the parties, in the peculiar factual matrix of the case at hand, this Court in the interest of justice is impelled to direct the Petitioners to submit a list of farmers along with the areas of cultivation afresh to the Opposite Party No.3-the Block Development Officer, Kolabira within a period of one week hence and on receipt of the same, the Opposite Party No.3 shall take a decision regarding the supply of water in the light of the resolution at Annexure-3 which admittedly still holds the field within a week of submission of such representation (keeping in view the urgency of requirement of water for the Rabi crop), considering the claim of all the stake holders.

The decision so taken shall be communicated to the Petitioners as well as the Opposite Parties.

The Opposite Party No.3-the Block Development Officer, Kolabira shall take such decision independently without being impeded or hindered by the earlier decision of the Gram Panchayat under Annexure-3.

For the reasons stated as above, the operation of Annexure-3 shall abide by the fresh decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.3.

Accordingly, the writ petition and the I.A(s) stand disposed of. Costs made easy.