Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17182 (PNJ)

ANIL KUMAR AND ANOTHER v. DIVISIONAL CANAL OFFICER AND OTHERS

CWP/5440/2026 · 2026-03-17

Harsh Bunger

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APURVA 2026.03.24 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh 2.2 It appears that the learned Sub Divisional Canal Officer, Malookpur Canal Sub Division, Abohar, vide order dated 16.10.2025/07.11.2025 (Annexure P-2), ordered restoration of the watercourse at point ‘C-D-E’. 2.3 Being dissatisfied, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the learned Divisional Canal Officer, Abohar, which came to be allowed vide order dated 31.12.2025 (Annexure P-3). While setting aside the order dated 07.11.2025 (Annexure P-2) on the ground that the watercourse at point ‘F-F1-F2’ was in existence and even warabandi stood sanctioned thereon, the Appellate Authority directed that the land originally reserved for the watercourse during consolidation, as comprised in Eastern Boundary of Khasra Nos.18//19/2 and 22, Southern Boundary of 23-24-25, Southern Boundary of Rectangle No.17//21/2-22-23-24-25, Southern Boundary of Rectangle No.16//21-22/2-23-24-25, be made free from occupation. APURVA 2026.03.24 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh 31.12.2025 (Annexure P-3) passed , Abohar Canal Division, Abohar, 9. All the pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed. APURVA 2026.03.24 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh