HYDERABAD, March 31: The Hyderabad circuit bench of Sindh High Court on Friday issued notices to secretary irrigation, managing director Sindh Irrigation and Drainage Authority, director Nara canal area water board, other irrigation officials, besides two land-owners on a constitutional petition filed by two tail-end growers, challenging transfer of water from channels by secretary irrigation.

The petitioners, Mureed Akbar and Raees, who were represented by Ejaz Ali Hakro said that they respectively owned 39 and 63 acres of land in Sanghar district which were located on the watercourse 2DL Mithrao canal.

They said that the executive engineer of Mithrao division and the assistant executive engineer Sindhri sub-division prepared a share list which said that they were getting water for 152 out of 366.14 acres and their lands were at tail-end.

They added that the lands of respondents, Jan Mohammad and Ms Amanat, were settled on water course 13AT Dhilyar minor as per register maintained by respondent irrigation officials and the above water course was in exclusive use of the two respondents.

They said that the father and husband of the respondents were getting water from watercourse 2CL Mithrao canal as they were big and influential landlords as per register.

They informed that Jan Mohammad moved an application on February 24 to the chief minister of Sindh for transfer of their water from Dhilyar minor to Mithrao direct canal, falsely showing that they were not getting any water and the CM ordered for placing the summary. The same application was sent to CM again on February 26 for further orders. They maintained that secretary irrigation under order dated December 31,2005 addressed to MD SIDA and conveyed approval of competent authority in favour of private respondents for transfer of peach of an area of 230 acres from watercourse 13AT ex-Dhilyar minor to existing watercourse 2DL ex-Mithrao canal and further ordered that approval is subject to observance of all legal and codal formalities under Sindh Irrigation Act and expenditures involved in implementation would be borne by private respondents.

They said that respondents were already getting their lands irrigated according to law from watercourse no 13AT Dhilyar minor and watercourse 2CL Mithrao canal and change of peach/watercourse could only be allowed under provisions of Sindh Irrigation Act for which respondents were required under law to call objections on application of private respondent, from other khatedars of watercourse 2DL.