IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civl Writ Petition No.11505 of 2011 Date of Decision : July 20, 2011. Amrik Singh .....Petitioner versus The Superintendent Canal Officer and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Sarju Puri, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 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 petitioner is aggrieved by the orders dated 21.7.2010 and 9.11.2010 (Annexures P-1 & P-3) passed by respondent Nos.2 & 1 respectively, whereby the request made by the private respondents for shifting of their agricultural land to outlet No.26143/R has been accepted and the said order has been upheld in appeal. The agricultural land of the private respondents was earlier being irrigated from the previous outlet No.27250/R which is located upstream. According to the petitioner, shifting of the land of the private respondents to the new outlet would reduce the intake of water of the existing outlet and would adversely affect the irrigation of the petitioner's CWP No.11505 of 2011 [2] fields. The authorities who are the subject experts, on the other hand, have held otherwise on the basis of the inspection report of the Ziledar and S.D.O. In these circumstances, the issue as to whether the petitioner's land continues to have better irrigation or not being a question within the domain of the subject experts, who have concurrently decided, I am of the considered view that it is not appropriate for a writ court to interfere with these findings and/or substitute its own decision. Dismissed. July 20, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE