IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.WP No. 16434 of 2007. [O&M] Date of Decision: 28th July, 2011. Sahib Ram & Ors. Petitioners through Mr. Naresh Sekhawat, Advocate Versus Superintending Canal Officer, IB Circle, Patiala & Ors. Respondents through Mrs. Charu Tuli, DAG, Punjab Mr. RVS Chugh, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 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? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL] The petitioners seek quashing of the orders dated 01.08.2007 and 06.09.2007 [Annexures P-1 and P-2] passed by respondents No. 1 and 2. Pursuant to the notice of motion, the respondents have put in appearance. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and after marathon discussion and securitization of the site plans, placed on record, depicting location of the outlets and the landholdings of the parties which are irrigated through Outlet RD-73500 and as agreed to by learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the outlet RD-74300 shall be kept operational and the land of the petitioners shall be provided irrigation from the said outlet. The owners of the adjoining lands shall also be at liberty to seek re- allocation/transfer of their lands to RD-74300. Similarly, RD-73500 shall also remain operational and the land of the private respondents shall continue to be irrigated from the said outlet. The adjoining land owners shall also be at liberty to get their land irrigated through the said outlet RD-73500. In case any additional expenditure is to be borne by the department for making both the outlets operational, the burden shall be proportionately shared by the landowners. The impugned orders are modified accordingly. Disposed of. Dasti. July 28, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE