In Brief
The petitioners sought to quash orders passed by canal authorities requiring restoration of a watercourse they had demolished. The authorities found that the watercourse had existed for 20 years and had been lined by CAD authorities, making it protected 'by prescription of law' under the Haryana Canal & Drainage Act. Multiple appellate levels upheld the restoration order. The Court held that the factual findings were sound, the watercourse qualified for legal protection, and the authorities acted within jurisdiction. The petitioners' rights to demolish were outweighed by the private respondents' irrigation rights. The writ petition was dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.