ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

C.P.No.D-10 of 2017.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on office objection at flag A.

2.For orders on MA No.137 of 2017.

3.For orders on MA No.27 of 2017.

4.For katcha peshi.

12.01.2017.

Mr. Athar Abbas Solangi, Advocate for Petitioners.

                   ----------------

                        The petitioners through this petition have sought direction to the Irrigation authorities for restoration of certain water courses which according to them were demolished. They had written a letter to Respondent No.4 sometime in 2013 but they did not follow it. They have not even sent a reminder for reconstruction or restoration of water courses during the last three years. However, after more than 03 years following letter from respondent No.3 to respondent No.4 dated 03.6.2016 came to their hands.

               “OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER RICE 

CANAL DIVISION MEHAR @ KN SHAH

                                                                        No.DB/D-55/439 of 2016.

                                                                                                KN Shah dated:03.06.2016.

To,                  

                        The Assistant Exe: Engineer

                        Dhamrao Sub Division.

SUBJECT:      AN APPLICATION OF KHATEDAR MUNAWAR ALI JATOI & YASIN ALI CHANDIA REQUESTING FOR RESTORATION OF HIS KASSIE FROM W.C.IIR EX: ARTHER BRANCH.                                                                                                                         

                        Enclosed please find herewith an application received from Khatedar Yasin Ali Chandio and Munawar Ali Jatoi requesting for restoration of his sanctioned kasie for S.Nos:973,974,976,954,953,959, from W.C 11 R Ex: Arther Branch. In this connection this office peed information case sent to you vide this office letter No.IC/D-55/RCD-853 dated 13.05.2013. After laps 3 years you have not solve the matter. You are once again directed to please visit the site and solve the matter as per rules.

Executive Engineer

Rice Canal Division

Mehar @ KN Shah”

                        Even after having come across the aforesaid letter the petitioners remained silent and did not send reminder to even the respondent No.3, the author of the aforesaid letter. After 06 months of last letter and 03 years of first letter, they have straight away come before this Court under article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. The entire petition is silent on the question of fundamental right of the petitioners, if any, stand infringed.  It is strange that such a nice officer (respondent No.4), who has written a letter at his own to respondent No.3 regarding grievance of petitioners on an unsupported application and even that application has not been filed. He has not even referred to any specific date and time on which the petitioners have made such application to respondent No.4. Not only this the respondent No.3 himself has not taken any action against respondent No.4 pursuant to his observations in the above referred letter. It is also not identified by the petitioners that under what circumstances, they came across the aforementioned letter. The documents are not confidence inspiring. 

                        Be that as it may, even otherwise under the Sindh Irrigation Act, 1879,       a scheme has been provided for the redressal of the grievance of the petitioner. Unless the petitioners follow the proper legal course diligently they are not entitled to seek any remedy from this Court straight away. In the above circumstances, this petition is dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to follow the procedure provided under the Sindh Irrigation Act, 1879 for redressal of their grievance and then, if the circumstances exist and so advised, the petitioners may file petition subject to maintainability.

J U D G E

J U D G E

Syed Ashfaq