| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 139 2014 SLD 139 2014 SCMR 353 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Constitutional Petition No.59 of 2013, decision dated: 3rd December, 2013
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA AND AMIR HANI MUSLIM, JJ
Fayyaz Hussain Shah, Tauqir Ahmed and Qazi Faizullah for Petitioner. Abdul Malik Leghari for Applicant (in C.M.A. No. 892-K of 2013). Muhammad Khan Panhwar for Applicant (in C.M.A. No. 893-K of 2013). Adnan Karim, Additional A.G. on Courts Notice
Constitutional Petition No.59 of 2013, decision dated: 3rd December, 2013
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA AND AMIR HANI MUSLIM, JJ
Fayyaz Hussain Shah, Tauqir Ahmed and Qazi Faizullah for Petitioner. Abdul Malik Leghari for Applicant (in C.M.A. No. 892-K of 2013). Muhammad Khan Panhwar for Applicant (in C.M.A. No. 893-K of 2013). Adnan Karim, Additional A.G. on Courts Notice
Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411
Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435
Law: Sindh Irrigation Act, 1879
Section: 28(d)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 9,184(3)
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 430
Sindh Irrigation Act (VII of 1879)--- ----S. 28(d)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 430---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 9 & 184(3)---Constitutional petition under Art. 184(3) of the Constitution against sanctioning of direct water outlets from Naseer Branch Rohri Canal on the orders of the Chief Minister---Equal share in canal water---Tampering of water outlets of canal---Water theft---Grievance of petitioners was that water outlets from the canal in question were sanctioned in favour of influential and interested persons without acknowledging that due to such act, land of farmers situated at tail end of the canal did not get water equal to their share because before reaching the tail most of the water was taken by upper riparians---Provisions of Sindh Irrigation Act, 1879 were required to be strictly followed so that nobody could encroach upon the rights of others, as farmers were earning their livelihood to protect and secure their own life and that of their families, which was a fundamental right guaranteed under Art. 9 of the Constitution---Provincial Secretary for Irrigation submitted a report in court wherein he stated that he had visited all the water outlets; that all possible measures were being taken to redress the grievance of petitioners; that tampering of water outlets had been stopped, and that there would be strict supervision to ensure that no violation of Sindh Irrigation Act, 1879 was committed---District Police Officer (DPO) informed the court that fresh F.I.R. under S. 430, P.P.C. had been registered, and instructions were passed onto police officials to fully cooperate with the staff of irrigation department and take prompt action on their complaints---Petitioners stated in court that after passing of orders by the Supreme Court in relation to present petition, farmers whose lands were situated at the tail of the canal were also getting their share in canal water---Supreme Court directed that concerned Deputy Inspector General of Police and District Police Officers should take action against persons involved in water theft etc., and that before approaching the police, irrigation authorities should satisfy themselves that there was a…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492