'Disputed' Water Bodies Are To Be Identified By Experts, Mere Revenue Record Entries Not Enough For Verification: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court held that identification and protection of disputed water bodies required technical expert evaluation underscoring that mere revenue record entries were insufficient wherein ground realities are to be verified by the competent expert authority.

Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand was hearing a matter wherein petitioner's right of way to his allotted mining area was rejected by the State on the ground that the land in question was a pasture as well as a water body.

Observing that these were disputed facts which the court cannot determine under Article 226 jurisdiction of the Constitution, the high court directed the State to constitute an Expert Committee to ascertain these questions.

"Identification and protection of disputed water bodies require technical expert evaluation. Mere revenue record entries are not sufficient and the ground conditions/realities must be verified by the competent Expert Authority," the court said. 

The petitioner was allotted a mining area and the lands in questions were the only passage way to that area which was closed by the private respondents by raising unnecessary obstructions.

It was the case of the petitioner that he had been using those lands for last 20 years as the passage to the mining area, and the concerned Gram Panchayat had also issued no objection in favour of the petitioner in this regard.

Furthermore, it was submitted, that the District Magistrate also made a recommendation in his favour to use the lands as way to the mining area. However, despite all this, the State refused to accord sanction to the petitioner, holding that such lands were pasture lands and water body which could not be allotted or be allowed to be used.

It was argued on behalf of the State that the concerned lands were pasture and “Pokhar Nari Land” i.e. a water body. When the proposal was placed before the District Magistrate, this fact was not indicated anywhere that the land was a catchment area which could not be allotted to anyone.

The counsel further submitted that even in the impugned order, the District Magistrate was warned to not rely upon the reports submitted by the Subordinate Revenue Officers and relevant revenue records were to be seen before making any recommendations.

After hearing the contentions, the Court highlighted that the fact the concerned land was a water body or not was contentious, on which different versions were being put by both the Parties.

“As per the petitioner, there exists no 'Pokhar' or 'Nari' on the subject land, while as per the respondents, the subject land is surrounded by the mountains and seasonal river flows on the said land due to rain water in monsoon season.”

In this background, it was opined that, “All these facts can be adjudicated by an Expert Committee, consisting of High Ranking Officers of the Departments of Revenue, Forest and Panchayati Raj, who would examine the old revenue records and practical ground realities aspects of the matter…and then appropriate decision would be taken accordingly…”

Hence, the Court directed the State to constitute an “Expert Committee” for this purpose.

Accordingly, the petition was disposed of.

Title: M/s Subhash Chand Mukesh Chand v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2025 Live Law (Raj) 293

Click Here To Read/Download Order