IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.17903 of 2005 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 09, 2011 Sajjan Singh ...Petitioner Versus Bant Singh & another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Ms.Shikha Sharma, Advocate, for Mr.Vikas Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Vikas Mehsempuri, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr.A.S.Jattana, Addl.A.G.Punjab, for respondent No.2. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner has filed this writ petition being aggrieved against the order passed by Superintending Canal Officer dated 18.8.2005. The counsel for the petitioner has made reference to the Map prepared to make grievance that earlier the petitioner was getting water at point `B', which has now been changed to point `C'. As noticed in the impugned order, by this change the turn of the petitioner rather has been increased by 15 minutes. When asked to explain as to what grievance the petitioner has against this change, the counsel is unable to explain the same, but pleads that there was no reason to change the Wari of the petitioner once the respondent had purchased some portion of land. Simply because change has Civil Writ Petition No.17903 of 2005 (O&M) :2: been effected would not be a ground to interfere in the impugned order. Unless some prejudice or harm is shown, no case for interference would be made out. I do not see any infirmity in the impugned order, which would call for interference. Dismissed. August 09, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE