IN T TEJPAL SIN STATE OF CORAM: Present : HARSH BUN CM-17471- condonation revision petiti by this Court. allowed and A CWP-33065 the Constituti for setting as passed by t IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR L SINGH Versus OF HARYANA AND OTHERS HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HA Ms. Prerna Malhotra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G H BUNGER, J. [ORAL] CWP-2025 This is an application for placing ation of delay submitted by the appli n petition (Annexure P-7), in view of Court. For the reasons recorded in and Annexure P-7 is taken on record, 065-2025 (O&M) Prayer in the present writ petiti stitution of India, is for issuance of a w ting aside the impugned order dated by the learned Superintending Ca UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH CWP-33065-2025 (O&M) Date of decision :08.12.2025 …Petitioner …Respondents E HARSH BUNGER ocate l. A.G., Haryana. placing on record the application for applicant-petitioner along with his ew of order dated 10.11.2025 passed d in the application, the same is record, subject to all just exceptions. t petition, filed under Article 226 of e of a writ in the nature of certiorari, dated 12.05.2025 (Annexure P-5) ng Canal Officer, Yamuna Water 5 M) 25 n for h his ssed e is 6 of , 5) ater GURPREET KAUR 2025.12.09 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh Services Circle, Bhiwani and order dated 11.07.2025 (Annexure P-6) passed by the learned Chief Canal Officer, Haryana. 2. Briefly, the petitioner is stated to have submitted an application dated 24.04.2019 (Annexure P-1) to the Canal authorities, seeking restoration of demolished watercourse in the chak of Outlet RD- 6864-TR Saharwa minor, on the plea that respondents No.6 and 7 have demolished the same. The said application was allowed by the learned Sub Divisional Canal Officer, Sub Division Hisar, vide order dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) whereby, he directed that the watercourse from point `B’ to `C’ in the map, be restored for six months. 2.1 The afore-said order dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) was challenged by respondent No.7 herein, by filing an appeal before the learned Divisional Canal Officer, Siwani Water Services Division, Bhiwani; however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 28.08.2019 (Annexure P-3). 2.2 Apparently, both the above-referred orders dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) and 28.08.2019 (Annexure P-3) were not challenged further by respondents No.6 and 7 herein and the same attained finality. 2.3 Concededly, the above-referred orders dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) and 28.08.2019 (Annexure P-3) were implemented and the watercourse was restored and made functional at the site for six months. 2.4 It transpires that on 24.12.2024, the present petitioner preferred a revision petition against the above-referred orders dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) and 28.08.2019 (Annexure P-3) before the learned Superintending Canal Officer, Bhiwani. Alongwith the afore-said revision petition, an application (Annexure P-7) seeking condonation of delay was also filed. GURPREET KAUR 2025.12.09 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh 2.5 The learned Superintending Canal Officer, Bhiwani vide order dated 12.05.2025 (Annexure P-5) dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner, as time barred. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a petition under Section 20 of the Haryana Canal and Drainage Act, 1974 (in short `the 1974 Act’), which has also been dismissed vide order dated 11.07.2025 (Annexure P-6). 2.6 In the afore-mentioned circumstances, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition before this Court for seeking relief/s, as noticed here-in-above. 3. Heard. 4. In the present case, the petitioner sought restoration of the demolished watercourse, which was allowed by the learned Sub Divisional Canal Officer, vide order dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) for a period of six months only. The petitioner did not challenge the afore-said order dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) and accepted the restoration of watercourse for limited period of six months only. On the other hand, an appeal filed by respondent No.7 against order dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) was dismissed by the learned Divisional Canal Officer, vide order dated 29.08.2019 (Annexure P-3). The above-referred orders (Annexures P-2 and P-3) were not challenged any further and the watercourse was restored at the site and made operational for six months, as directed vide orders- Annexures P-2 and P-3. 4.1 It appears that after the watercourse had run for six months, the same was stopped and after a gap of more than five years, the petitioner thought of challenging the above-referred orders dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) and 28.08.2019 (Annexure P-3) by filing a revision before the learned Superintending Canal Officer on the plea that the watercourse GURPREET KAUR 2025.12.09 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh be restored permanently. However, the afore-said revision was dismissed by the learned Superintending Canal Officer being time barred by 2043 days, vide order dated 12.05.2025 (Annexure P-5). In the application seeking condonation of delay, the petitioner had made following assertions :- “2. That the applicant/revisionist is a senior citizen of 71 years of age and he is often ill and he was affected by Corona along with his family, due to which his condition remained very bad for 2-3 years and even now there is a huge risk for him in travelling to and from Karnal, although in between he has been in contact through letters and in person, yet he has not found any solution. The applicant has given to Mr. SDO sir Water Services Siwani Division at Hisar on 12.11.2020 and to Divisional Canal Officer Siwani Water Services Bhiwani on 12.11.2020 and 29.01.2021, apart from this he has given repeated applications on CM Window also but no justice was received, due to which he has now come to the conclusion that this revision should be filed before you so that he can get some justice. Therefore, the delay in filing the revision is unintentional, moreover law does not permit that the case be dismissed on the ground of delay. 3. That there are sufficient reasons to condone the delay in filing the present revision and in view of these circumstances, if any delay has occurred, it is necessary to condone it and the court has the power to condone the delay after hearing the application.” 4.2 I have considered the afore-said reasoning rendered by the petitioner for seeking condonation of delay, however, I find no substance therein. The petitioner has not shown any justifiable grounds for condonation of delay in filing of the revision petition. It appears that the petitioner had already accepted the initial order dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) whereby, the watercourse in question was restored only for GURPREET KAUR 2025.12.09 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh a limited period of six months, which was further affirmed by the learned Divisional Canal Officer, vide order dated 29.08.2019 (Annexure P-3). Filing of revision against the above-referred orders dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) and 29.08.2019 (Annexure P-3) on 24.12.2024, appears to be an afterthought. 5. Be that as it may, once the petitioner had already accepted the order dated 25.06.2019 (Annexure P-2) as he failed to lay any challenge thereto and the subsequent filing of revision, after a delay of more than 2000 days and that too, without there being any bona fide and justifiable grounds, I am of the considered view that the learned Superintending Canal Officer, had rightly dismissed the revision filed by the petitioner being time barred, vide order dated 12.05.2025 (Annexure P-5); which has been further affirmed by the learned Chief Canal Officer, vide order dated 11.07.2025 (Annexure P-6). 6. In view of the above discussion, I find no merit in the present writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. 7. All pending applications (if any) shall also stand closed. December 08, 2025 (HARSH BUNGER) gurpreet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No GURPREET KAUR 2025.12.09 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh