NARAYANA PAI, C. J. ( 1 ) THESE three writ petitions are heard together because they raise common questions of fact and law. The statement of the case and the formulation of the points are such that a detailed consideration of first of the writ petitions will dispose of all the writ petitions. ( 2 ) THE petitioners impugn an order of the State Government No pwd 3 II B 69 dated the 17th April 1969 directing an addition of an extent of 109 acres and 20 guntas of land of Rajeendrapura village, Kunigal taluk, tumkur district within what is described as the authorised achkat under the Deepambhudi tank situated in Huliyurdurga village of the said taluk. ( 3 ) THE petitioners are among the cultivators owning wet lands irrigated with the water of the said Deepambhudi tank. Their principal grievance in this case is that the inclusion of this additional area for irrigation with the water of the Deepambhudi tank would result in diminution of adequate supply of their lands. They also contend that the procedure prescribed by the Irrigation Act which governs the situation had not been followed with a view to take the first preliminary decision that the additional supply will not be detrimental to the existing supply. The legal contention is that the impugned order of the State Government is not in accordance with law or is at any rate beyond the scope of the statutory powers of the State Government. ( 4 ) THE bulk of the averments in both the affidavits relate to facts depended upon by the contending parties to make out their respective cases of inadequacy or adequacy oi water supply. ( 4 ) THE bulk of the averments in both the affidavits relate to facts depended upon by the contending parties to make out their respective cases of inadequacy or adequacy oi water supply. The petitioners state that the undoubted facts that in the year 1927-28, 140 acres of land Were excluded from the scope of water supply from the Deepambhudi tank and converted from wet to dry land and that an application by one of the petitioners for converting his dry land into wet land had been refused in may 1963 on the ground that it was npt desirable to add more achkat under the Deepambhudi tank, taken along with the undisputed fact or fact described by the petitioners as indisputable that there has not been any change in the circumstances so far as the water available in the tank is concerned furnish sufficient basis for their contention that the inclusion of this additional area wthin the achkat will result in dimunition of water supply to the petitioners and others already within the achkat. ( 5 ) ON behalf of the State Government, an affidavit by the Executive engineer, in charge of this irrigation work has set out, certain figures. He states that there is within what he describes as the achkat area of Deepambhudi tank another tank called the Kempabhudi tank with a capacity to feed 154 acres, and gives the following calculations: