C.W.P No.18297 of 2008 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. C.W.P No.18297 of 2008 Date of Decision: 22.10.2008 Avtar Singh and others ....Petitioner. Versus Chief Canal Officer and others ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr.Justice J.S. Khehar Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Shailender Jain, Advocate for the petitioners. ... J.S. Khehar, J. (Oral). Through the instant writ petition, the petitioners have impugned the orders dated 28.6.2006 (Annexure P-2), dated 1.12.2006 (Annexure P-4) and eventually, the order dated 29.8.2008 (Annexure P-6), whereby the facility of irrigation, which was earlier provided to respondents No.4 to 6 from Outlet RD 1250-L has been shifted to Outlet RD 4100-L. In order to understand the effect of the shifting of the outlet of the respondents from Outlet RD 1250-L to Outlet RD 4100-L, learned counsel for the petitioners, has invited our attention to the site plan - Annexure P-7. Having invited our attention to the aforesaid site plan, the first contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners, is that Outlet RD 1250-L from which the respondents were earlier being provided the facility C.W.P No.18297 of 2008 2 of irrigation, is upstream, whereas Outlet RD 4100-L to which the irrigation facility of the respondents has been shifted, is downstream. As such, it would not be for the benefit of the respondents to be shifted from Outlet RD 1250-L to Outlet RD 4100-L, as it is well established that better irrigation facility is natural from upstream rather than from downstream. In so far as the aforesaid contention is concerned, we find absolutely no merit therein. Water had to travel in an irrigation channel for a long distance before it reached the land of the private respondents when they were irrigating their land from Outlet RD 1250-L, whereas by the shifting of their outlet to RD 4100-L, the outlet is within their land itself. As such, we are satisfied that it would ensure better irrigation facility to the respondents as water would continue to travel through Ghaswa Minor Canal till it reaches their land for irrigation upto Outlet RD 4100-L. The second contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners, is that the levels of the land would have to be varied and altered as a consequence of shifting of the Outlet RD 1250-L to Outlet RD 4100-L. As such, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners, that substantial loss would be caused in the process to others besides the respondents as they would have to vary the existing level of flow of water. We are satisfied that the second contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners, as has been noticed in the foregoing paragraph, is clearly misconceived. All those who were earlier getting irrigation from Outlet RD 1250-L will continue to draw irrigation from the same, and as such, there will be no requirement for any change of levels, whereas the respondents have been assigned the facility of irrigation now from Outlet RD 4100-L. This outlet falls within the lands which are to be C.W.P No.18297 of 2008 3 irrigated therefrom. As such, we are of the view that the respondents themselves being not aggrieved by the action of shifting of Outlet RD 1250- L to Outlet RD 4100-L, is inconsequential in so far as the petitioners are concerned. No other contention was advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Having perused the site plan Annexure P-7, we are of the view that the providing of irrigation facility to the respondents from Outlet RD 4100-L would not only be in the interest of the private respondents, but would not cause any harm or detriment to the petitioners (as no such submission has been made on their behalf). For the reasons recorded hereinabove, we find no merit in the instant writ petition, and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. ( J.S. Khehar ) Judge ( Nirmaljit Kaur ) Judge. 22.10.2008 sk.